Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

With the discovery that a babies genome is present in foetal blood, we can think how wonderful at 12 weeks parents can safely determine if their child is going to have Downs Syndrome and other diseases which previously could only be determined later and at risk to the mother. What wonderful benign tech you think, isn't Science going to improve our world. I thought the same about the computer, instead it's led to an extra layer of bureacracy and instead of streamlining work gathers copious irrelevent information which along with tech like anpr camera's has turned the U.K. into a veritable open prison. Forgive me for seeing possible dangers in this 'brave new world'.

you are correct

the computer has had no great beneficial impact on our society

Originally posted by Free_Speech
With the discovery that a babies genome is present in foretal blood, we can think how wonderful at 12 weeks parents can safely determine if their child is going to have Downs Syndrome and other diseases which previously could only be determined later and at risk to the mother. What wonderful benign tech you think, isn't Science going to improve our world. I thought the same about the computer, instead it's led to an extra layer of bureacracy and instead of streamlining work gathers copious irrelevent information which along with tech like anpr camera's has turned the U.K. into a veritable open prison. Forgive me for seeing possible dangers in this 'brave new world'.
Go away, Whirly.

Originally posted by inimalist
you are correct

the computer has had no great beneficial impact on our society




Oh it has, it just didn't liberate the workforce from drudgery, you'd have to be old enough to realise why I said that though son. :-) Haha, I spelt foetal wrong.

Fun fact: Aldous Huxley actually rejected brave new world as a predictor of the future in his later years, in favor of an actual utopia of "The Island".

Originally posted by Free_Speech
With the discovery that a babies genome is present in foetal blood, we can think how wonderful at 12 weeks parents can safely determine if their child is going to have Downs Syndrome and other diseases which previously could only be determined later and at risk to the mother. What wonderful benign tech you think, isn't Science going to improve our world. I thought the same about the computer, instead it's led to an extra layer of bureacracy and instead of streamlining work gathers copious irrelevent information which along with tech like anpr camera's has turned the U.K. into a veritable open prison. Forgive me for seeing possible dangers in this 'brave new world'.

It would be a PC/ethical minefield. I don't think most parents want a dumbshit for a kid who can't contribute to society, so I guess there will be no more "special needs" people if GATTACA technology becomes real.

I wonder if it will be like those video games that let you create a character; a pregnant woman would be able to basically customize her child (eye color, height and so on).

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
It would be a PC/ethical minefield. I don't think most parents want a dumbshit for a kid who can't contribute to society, so I guess there will be no more "special needs" people if GATTACA technology becomes real.

I wonder if it will be like those video games that let you create a character; a pregnant woman would be able to basically customize her child (eye color, height and so on).

We are almost there...already.

Originally posted by King Kandy
Fun fact: Aldous Huxley actually rejected brave new world as a predictor of the future in his later years, in favor of an actual utopia of "The Island".

Yes, I actually knew that. I kind of feel we have a sort of incompetant Orwellian 'Big Brother' now in the U.K. Nanny state etc.. except it's so incompetant. Hilarious really.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
It would be a PC/ethical minefield. I don't think most parents want a dumbshit for a kid who can't contribute to society, so I guess there will be no more "special needs" people if GATTACA technology becomes real.

I bet there would be. But, the only people who will keep those children are pro-life churchers. It works out well in a way. Before long, all the churchers kids will be drool machines who need helmets and leashes. Their kids don't breed. Chruchers die out. Humanity is saved.

If the baby is born with any promblems it should not be consider a curse but a blessing.Babies with promblems need extra attention and love.I hate how people just abort there baby just because there is something wrong with it.

Originally posted by ADarksideJedi
If the baby is born with any promblems it should not be consider a curse but a blessing.Babies with promblems need extra attention and love.I hate how people just abort there baby just because there is something wrong with it.

have you ever worked with the severely mentally handicapped?

Originally posted by inimalist
have you ever worked with the severely mentally handicapped?

Actualy yes, my socialist/anarchist mentality is incredibly altruistic. I do put my money where my heart is.

Originally posted by Free_Speech
Actualy yes, my socialist/anarchist mentality is incredibly altruistic. I do put my money where my heart is.

very nice

its pretty rewarding, is it not?

I assume that, while maybe warning against abuses, you aren't totally against genetic pre-screening for health issues in vitro?

my point to darkside was more that, sure, we can give these people a good life, but even the best we can provide for them is barely functional. I think her opinions of abortion and science in general are sort of blinding her to the actual good that can come from eliminating things like Huntington's disease or cystic fibrosis

Originally posted by inimalist
very nice

its pretty rewarding, is it not?

I assume that, while maybe warning against abuses, you aren't totally against genetic pre-screening for health issues in vitro?

my point to darkside was more that, sure, we can give these people a good life, but even the best we can provide for them is barely functional. I think her opinions of abortion and science in general are sort of blinding her to the actual good that can come from eliminating things like Huntington's disease or cystic fibrosis

I found it rewarding, as I found my time in Histopath..so long ago.
Yes the positives are great, give it time though and the rich will subvert it. The more we uderstand the actual function of genes, the more insurance companies (already started) will control us. I believe in the anonymity of your, mine and everybody's biomatter except in relation to curing disease. On and Jackie Malfoy is not what you think....

Originally posted by Free_Speech
I found it rewarding, as I found my time in Histopath..so long ago.
Yes the positives are great, give it time though and the rich will subvert it. The more we uderstand the actual function of genes, the more insurance companies (already started) will control us. I believe in the anonymity of your, mine and everybody's biomatter except in relation to curing disease. On and Jackie Malfoy is not what you think....

well, like you said about computers not freeing labour, the same is true with the doom prophecies

sure, we might have a "big brother" state, but it is only tangentally related to what Orwell or others had warned us of.

I'm with you, there are obvious abuses that insurance companies are going to pull, but I tend to think the danger is overblown

Originally posted by inimalist
well, like you said about computers not freeing labour, the same is true with the doom prophecies

sure, we might have a "big brother" state, but it is only tangentally related to what Orwell or others had warned us of.

I'm with you, there are obvious abuses that insurance companies are going to pull, but I tend to think the danger is overblown

We'll see.....

I don't know, I think it might actually end up resulting in a whole new field of medicine; the treating and healing of the fetus before it is ever born would be a huge financial incentive for the health industry.

However, the truly false assumption in this thread is that abortion is at all an easily-reached conclusion for people.

Originally posted by skekUng
I don't know, I think it might actually end up resulting in a whole new field of medicine; the treating and healing of the fetus before it is ever born would be a huge financial incentive for the health industry.

However, the truly false assumption in this thread is that abortion is at all an easily-reached conclusion for people.

You could do this before dedifferention when you just have stem cells. After that.. unlikely imo.

Whats a Gattaca?

Originally posted by Free_Speech
You could do this before dedifferention when you just have stem cells. After that.. unlikely imo.

We'll see. The title of the thread references Gattaca, a little sci-fi is acceptable I think.

Originally posted by Free_Speech
You could do this before dedifferention when you just have stem cells. After that.. unlikely imo.

well, modern birth control has, essentially, made having a child an action of choice. so as technology improves, identifying a "would be" fetus while it is undergoing the very early stages of development isn't impossible or even unreasonable.

Originally posted by Bicnarok
Whats a Gattaca?

A decent film, where in a future society your station in life is determined by your genetic disposition and the score it ranks.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GATTACA

But I assume you knew that and where making the "what's a whirly" joke that was common here years ago.

That movie's soooo damn boring.

I mean, maybe it wasn't the first time I saw it, but, it's one of those movies that my incompetent Westmoor teachers used to play, in all of their classes, because they didn't have the foresight to think that we'd all seen the movie before... in one of the other classes. That movie and Finding Nemo. I wonder if they just never got together, the teachers I mean, and actually discussed stuff like that; "Hey I'm gonna play this movie for my class, you haven't all already played this movie for your classes as well, have you?".

Or maybe they did, and they just didn't give a shit, maybe it's their way of trying to circumvent the huge lack of field trips that is a result of crappy school budget cuts, which is really pathetic if you think about it considering we spend like 6 billion dollars a month to fund the war in the middle east, and yet public schools can barely afford to pay bus drivers. derp derp derp. Convservative politics in action right thar, cut public spending in all of things that matter and pour money into the fire, that's how we beat the Russians derp derp derp!

I'd gladly spend a few extra thousand dollars in taxes if it means some poor guy gets to go to a museum on a field trip, instead of watching ****ING GATTICA FOR THE 12TH TIME THAT YEAR.

edit- Mehhh.... a lot of rage in this post.

Originally posted by RE: Blaxican
That movie's soooo damn boring.

I mean, maybe it wasn't the first time I saw it, but, it's one of those movies that my incompetent Westmoor teachers used to play, in all of their classes, because they didn't have the foresight to think that we'd all seen the movie before.

It's a great film in my opinion. Although I am aware many teachers show it.

Originally posted by RE: Blaxican
That movie's soooo damn boring.


It is. Then again, I think Ethan Hawke is boring in general. Training Day was a good movie, but it was all about Denzel. Hawke was just the perfunctory whiteboy who must star opposite the black male lead. The character Jake Hoyt could have been played by any white actor and the movie would have been the same.

Ethan Hawke's worst movie: Snow Falling On Cedars.

Originally posted by Free_Speech
give it time though and the rich will subvert it.

I suppose that depends on what you would class a subversion as...Is plastic surgery for aesthetic purposes a subversion of surgery and anesthesia?

Think of it from the other side...If a new and expensive medical breakthrough became available for an extortionately high price that would guarantee your unborn children would be free from disease and disability and also excel in life both physically and mentally AND you could afford the expense...Wouldn't you do it?...Would you consider yourself morally in the wrong simply because you had the money to afford it?

Originally posted by inimalist
have you ever worked with the severely mentally handicapped?

Yes actly I did and I enjoyed it.

Originally posted by ADarksideJedi
Yes actly I did and I enjoyed it.

huh, cool

that experience didn't leave you feeling that the suffering involved in even daily tasks they have to perform is a type of cruelty that no person should have to suffer?

Originally posted by inimalist
huh, cool

that experience didn't leave you feeling that the suffering involved in even daily tasks they have to perform is a type of cruelty that no person should have to suffer?

A long time ago I applied and took the training to care for mentally handicapped adults. I finished the training, but did not go any further. It was not only physically difficult work, but a mental and emotional draining job. I think it is better if we, as a society, could detect these problems as early as possible, and prevent their birth. Keep in mind that I am not a pro-abortion person.

Originally posted by inimalist
huh, cool

that experience didn't leave you feeling that the suffering involved in even daily tasks they have to perform is a type of cruelty that no person should have to suffer?

No it made me relised that each of the kids may be suffering but they are taking life as it goes and all of them are very happy as well.