Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,912 Year: 4,169/9,624 Month: 1,040/974 Week: 367/286 Day: 10/13 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Playing God with Neanderthals
slevesque
Member (Idle past 4670 days)
Posts: 1456
Joined: 05-14-2009


Message 10 of 144 (547892)
02-23-2010 5:12 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Nuggin
02-23-2010 11:39 AM


I would think it immoral from the point of view of if there are huge risks of it having a disgusting life.
On the other hand, if we could perfect the thing to the point of knowing he would successfully grow, why not ?
For my part I think neanderthals were pretty much humans, but with overly atheltic genes and capacities. I do think the popular picture of a dumb brute is probably far from the reality of who they were, and I wouldn't be surprised if they were just as intelligent as us.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Nuggin, posted 02-23-2010 11:39 AM Nuggin has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by Meldinoor, posted 02-23-2010 5:43 PM slevesque has not replied
 Message 12 by Nuggin, posted 02-23-2010 6:24 PM slevesque has replied

  
slevesque
Member (Idle past 4670 days)
Posts: 1456
Joined: 05-14-2009


Message 13 of 144 (547926)
02-23-2010 10:36 PM
Reply to: Message 12 by Nuggin
02-23-2010 6:24 PM


I meant birth defect.
My personal opinion being that Neanderthals are humans, I would be against abortion in this situation.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by Nuggin, posted 02-23-2010 6:24 PM Nuggin has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 14 by Huntard, posted 02-24-2010 5:16 AM slevesque has replied

  
slevesque
Member (Idle past 4670 days)
Posts: 1456
Joined: 05-14-2009


Message 36 of 144 (548036)
02-25-2010 12:55 AM
Reply to: Message 14 by Huntard
02-24-2010 5:16 AM


Sorry I didn't really explain myself. Nuggin was saying ''well if it turned out to have some horrible disease we could just abort the foetus''.
Me saying I was against abortion just meant that this wasn't a moral option in my opinion, so if there was a risk of birth defect during the experiment I wouldn't do it at all. (instead of doing it, only to kill 99 foetus's out of 100)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by Huntard, posted 02-24-2010 5:16 AM Huntard has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by hooah212002, posted 02-25-2010 2:09 AM slevesque has not replied
 Message 39 by Huntard, posted 02-25-2010 4:00 AM slevesque has replied

  
slevesque
Member (Idle past 4670 days)
Posts: 1456
Joined: 05-14-2009


Message 59 of 144 (548107)
02-25-2010 3:57 PM
Reply to: Message 39 by Huntard
02-25-2010 4:00 AM


I was referring to if there was a huge risk of birth defect, which was the focus of the first page of discussion (didn't read he rest)
As for any some sort of limit, I guess when the chances of birth defect would go down to as low as normal sexual reproduction, then at that point I would not mind the experiments.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by Huntard, posted 02-25-2010 4:00 AM Huntard has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 61 by Huntard, posted 02-25-2010 4:00 PM slevesque has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024