In pursuit of this inquiry, I first focused my research on the moral obligations of genetic engineering, an ever-expanding innovation. I discovered a scientific community divided into two highly polarized groups; one saying that biotechnology should be researched and promoted, and another saying that it is completely unethical. The idea of “editing” the genetic code of life has a negative connotation in the minds of worried ethicists and anxious scientists, whether in the midst of a deadly famine, discussions of environmental security, or during research into synthetic genomes of experimental organisms and embryos. Surprisingly, there are heated arguments over whether a country as powerful as the United States should sit idly by and let millions in developing nations starve to maintain an ethical high ground, barring tampering with biological genetic composition, or whether a clinic should a deny a family the prospect of a healthy child to avoid taking …show more content…
Though mostly exaggerated, these fears do touch upon the idea of a world where genetics are heavily stressed, to the point that undesirable traits are simply erased from the population gene pool. In his article, Designer Babies: The Problem with Genetic Engineering, Michael Sandel writes, “There are many today who say the only thing wrong with eugenics was its coerciveness, and if we could imagine a eugenic program that was not mandated by the State, that was not coercive, but was chosen by the individual parents trying to help and lift up their children, then there's nothing wrong with eugenics.” This is the reality GM researchers and detractors claim will become the norm if progression of the “innovation of the century” continues to grow unchecked - privatized, free market, and individualistic eugenics in the form of designer babies