question of parentage.
Despite the small annoyance in the morning, when I woke up - sticky taste neurons and painful - I ask myself the same old questions: What have I even said so? Am I going too far in provoking? Will I eventually finds impossible my friends ... I must admit that I like it definitely. Like when Heavy prohibited words and arrive at the table laden with bottles half empty. I like to put my two big feet in dishes like the most fragile and push the cap away. It's stronger than me. Alcohol galore help the general unpacking, he disinhibits ideas too shameful to be fair, it will take to go after some disturbing logic. But sometimes, it releases a flood of words suddenly too loose and does not help the clarity of the debate. So, like opinions, and that the games are intensifying, as everyone thinks he understand the world better than its neighbor - then - steal "big jerk! " depart between the smell of rum, " fuck you " the to" anyway you know nothing " and other delicate" you're starting to piss me off " . It's good sometimes to let go a bit and all that remains jovial. Thank you ... words
You never know how some individuals arrive on the carpet in vitro fertilization for example, was invited to the debate and gave her the souk. Clarify a bit about.
course if friends were using this technique, I congratulate me without even asking questions. The bottom line, it seems, remains a matter of trend dynamics. It is absurd that the right to a child (right up against for that matter ...) is involved in the genetic drift, which in turn can lead to a form of eugenics. Liberal apologists of scientism would be on the point, without moral questioning, to return to the anthropological foundations of human societies: a dad, a mom, a child. The question is not for or against but how and why. Just like abortion or euthanasia, no need for fundamentalist Catholic respect life, human, procreation and for at least wonder. The scientific organization of humanity scares me. Genetics - when it is not medical - now seems capable of radically transforming humanity, to sign his death, to organize a large mass suicide ... In sum offer the right to happiness at any cost !
Lifestyle changes - and the right to anything and everything that goes with it - presented as progress, is - according I consider that a cop-out for the new man, well, beauty incarnate, hedonism stripped of humanity. The right to a child opens the Pandora's box and the queue at the counter. Purchases by children ... Let's go: The right of a single mother to sit on fatherhood in the name of his desire, the right of the richest to go do their shopping in Mali and Viet Nam. Soon the right of homosexuals to fertilize the anus, the right of old sows billionaires lifted all of childbearing age to sixty, fathers why not also have the joy of bringing the child on behalf parity, the measure would obviously progressive. Soon as the right to have a perfect child, a la carte with a choice of eye color, shape etc. torso. One can even imagine a child mixed hermaphrodite, or a third eye in the back of the skull. But I digress a little to push the logic of force. Habermas spoke of liberal eugenics and summarizes quite what I sometimes think:
eugenic dreams have a heavy political past. Therefore it seems that in future we proceed instead to a "liberal eugenics". I mean a practice that would allow parents planning to have a child for him to choose among a range of genetic models, characteristics, dispositions and capabilities they value most. Nobody knows, for now, if such a "consumer item" ever exist. The thorny question of the scope and detail that may have operations on the human genome divides the experts themselves and to this day remains unanswered. But experience proves that many things that seemed, until recently, noted science fiction was, by far exceeded by reality, particularly in the field of reproductive medicine. This should encourage us to be cautious. I naturally have no objection to genetic interventions justified by medical necessity, but the boundaries between gene therapy and eugenics "positive" are unclear, and must instead be more reserved than the face of manipulations aimed at improving the human genetic heritage, fall of eugenics in the strict sense.
Habermas "The future of human nature. Towards a Liberal Eugenics? "
0 comments:
Post a Comment