Do we NEED genetic engineering?

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2003-08-07 02:11am

Also, I question the notion of homosexuality as a trait which can be turned on or off so easily. It strikes me as more of a spectrum of behaviour rather than an on/off trait (as proven by the existence of bisexuals).

TrailerParkJawa · Post by **TrailerParkJawa** » 2003-08-07 02:13am

Like any technology, there are positive and negative effects. I worry about the unforseen or unintended consequences of GE. However, Im living proof of why at least some GE should exist.

I have neurofibromotosis. I have mild case, and unless you are really good at spotting the tell tale clues that indicate NF, you would never know unless you saw me without my shirt. On my lower back is a funny looking patch that kinda looks like caulifour. About an 1-2 inches long.

Anyway, I have a 50% chance of passing NF to my children should I have them. If they have a mild case like me its not a big issue, but if they are like my aunt, then they stand a chance of being disfigured, going deaf, and all sorts of problems. My father had to have surgery on his spine because he was losing feeling in his hands.

I do not want to pass this to my children. I do not want to pass a defective gene to them. I do not want them to suffer because I have a problem. So you see, if there is a way to "engineer" out the bad gene then Im for it.

Post by **Alyrium Denryle** » 2003-08-07 02:17am

Darth Wong wrote:Also, I question the notion of homosexuality as a trait which can be turned on or off so easily. It strikes me as more of a spectrum of behaviour rather than an on/off trait (as proven by the existence of bisexuals).

Then why is it possible to engineer gay insects.

I personally think it could be explained by either a combination of genetics/hormons or that more than one gene would be involved.

http://www.stanford.edu/dept/news/relag ... vgene.html

They showed that the fru gene is:

A master gene that controls not only sexual orientation but all, or nearly all, the steps in the male fly's elaborate courtship ritual from its first interest in a female through its rhythmic courting song, to its attempts to mate.
Part of a group of genes that work together to govern all aspects of sex in these flies, including development of male and female organs.
At work in a very small fraction of the cells in the fly's brain. The properties of the fru gene's target neurons suggest that they carry out command-and-control functions to set up and coordinate the complex events of male courtship and copulation.

Granted,, in humans it is probably far more complex.. but the basic principle behind it would remain the same. A gene that controls sexual behavior would be common to every species on this planet tht used sexual reproduction.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2003-08-07 02:31am

Alyrium Denryle wrote:Granted,, in humans it is probably far more complex.. but the basic principle behind it would remain the same. A gene that controls sexual behavior would be common to every species on this planet tht used sexual reproduction.

OK, let's assume that every single couple on the planet uses GM to ensure that there are no homosexual children in the next generation. That's a rather large leap, which I don't think is true, but for the sake of argument, let's assume it's true anyway. Why is that necessarily a tragedy?

Mistreatment of homosexuals is immoral because they are suffering, both physically and emotionally, and it is wrong to inflict suffering on others. Discrimination against homosexuals is immoral because it is unjust. But homosexuality is simply a trait, like having blonde hair, and if no more gay (or blonde) children were being born, the world might arguably be a poorer place in terms of diversity, but it's not as if any individual person would be hurt or treated unjustly as a result.

kojikun · Post by **kojikun** » 2003-08-07 02:34am

Darth Wong wrote:Mistreatment of homosexuals is immoral because they are suffering, both physically and emotionally, and it is wrong to inflict suffering on others. Discrimination against homosexuals is immoral because it is unjust. But homosexuality is simply a trait, like having blonde hair, and if no more gay (or blonde) children were being born, the world might arguably be a poorer place in terms of diversity, but it's not as if any individual person would be hurt or treated unjustly as a result.

It wouldn't be a tragedy, but its the implication that the world is homophobic and wants us gone thats the tragedy.

Post by **haas mark** » 2003-08-07 02:43am

Alyrium Denryle wrote:
Darth Wong wrote:Also, I question the notion of homosexuality as a trait which can be turned on or off so easily. It strikes me as more of a spectrum of behaviour rather than an on/off trait (as proven by the existence of bisexuals).
Then why is it possible to engineer gay insects.

I personally think it could be explained by either a combination of genetics/hormons or that more than one gene would be involved.

The problem, Aly, I think is this: Where flies are insects, we are mammals. Two very different things. Though I am sure that in the future we will be able to say what causes a sexual orientation, is there any evidence as to engineering gay mammals?

~ver

Post by **Alyrium Denryle** » 2003-08-07 02:48am

A fly is governed by the same types of biological drives we are.. Why would there be genetic controls for sex in one species, but not another?

IIRC the genetic similarity between us and a fly is 80% anyway...

Post by **haas mark** » 2003-08-07 02:49am

Alyrium Denryle wrote:A fly is governed by the same types of biological drives we are.. Why would there be genetic controls for sex in one species, but not another?

I didn't say there wouldn't be, just thought that they might be different, is all.

IIRC the genetic similarity between us and a fly is 80% anyway...

This I know, but are there any studies that show some of the same results as per engineering homosexual mammals?

~ver

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2003-08-07 02:54am

Speaking of other mammals, dogs are not homosexual, but they're not choosy either

Post by **haas mark** » 2003-08-07 02:55am

Darth Wong wrote:Speaking of other mammals, dogs are not homosexual, but they're not choosy either

Having fun tonight, Wong?

But true.. dogs just wanna get laid.

~ver

kojikun · Post by **kojikun** » 2003-08-07 02:58am

verilon wrote:But true.. dogs just wanna get laid.

~ver

Who the hell doesnt?!

Post by **haas mark** » 2003-08-07 02:59am

kojikun wrote:
verilon wrote:But true.. dogs just wanna get laid.

~ver
Who the hell doesnt?!

Anhedonics.

~ver

kojikun · Post by **kojikun** » 2003-08-07 03:00am

verilon wrote:Anhedonics.

~ver

Well fuck em! Or rather, don't.

Post by **Alyrium Denryle** » 2003-08-07 03:01am

verilon wrote:
Alyrium Denryle wrote:A fly is governed by the same types of biological drives we are.. Why would there be genetic controls for sex in one species, but not another?
I didn't say there wouldn't be, just thought that they might be different, is all.

IIRC the genetic similarity between us and a fly is 80% anyway...
This I know, but are there any studies that show some of the same results as per engineering homosexual mammals?

~ver

I dont think THAT has been done yet. The problem with mammals is that they dont breed as rapidly as flies.. So isolating a gene takes a hell of a lot longer...

They have however compared brain differences in homosexual and straight sheep.... and have found simliar differences in humans.

Post by **haas mark** » 2003-08-07 03:02am

Ok cool cool. Because I have heard that transgenderedness is from a different size in one part of the brain.

~ver

kojikun · Post by **kojikun** » 2003-08-07 03:04am

verilon wrote:Ok cool cool. Because I have heard that transgenderedness is from a different size in one part of the brain.

~ver

Yes, in straight males the pussy-seeking section of the brain is drastically larger because of fuckall. I'd like to know the mechanism behind mental gaiety tho.

Post by **haas mark** » 2003-08-07 03:07am

kojikun wrote:
verilon wrote:Ok cool cool. Because I have heard that transgenderedness is from a different size in one part of the brain.

~ver
Yes, in straight males the pussy-seeking section of the brain is drastically larger because of fuckall. I'd like to know the mechanism behind mental gaiety tho.

mania?

just kidding. It would be interesting to find out one day what causes sexual orientation, though.

~ver

Post by **haas mark** » 2003-08-07 03:07am

Another question.. If we could potentially "fix" homosexuality, could we fix other REAL problems in the world, such as a tendency toward pedophilia?

~ver

kojikun · Post by **kojikun** » 2003-08-07 03:08am

verilon wrote:mania?

I was thinking inbreeding but that works.

just kidding. It would be interesting to find out one day what causes sexual orientation, though.

~ver

It would. But lets just hope that it doesn't turn out that its cause by an error in growth, yes?

Howedar · Post by **Howedar** » 2003-08-07 03:10am

kojikun wrote:
Darth Wong wrote:Mistreatment of homosexuals is immoral because they are suffering, both physically and emotionally, and it is wrong to inflict suffering on others. Discrimination against homosexuals is immoral because it is unjust. But homosexuality is simply a trait, like having blonde hair, and if no more gay (or blonde) children were being born, the world might arguably be a poorer place in terms of diversity, but it's not as if any individual person would be hurt or treated unjustly as a result.
It wouldn't be a tragedy, but its the implication that the world is homophobic and wants us gone thats the tragedy.

No, people want the blond hair gone. They don't want the blonds gone.

Post by **haas mark** » 2003-08-07 03:13am

Howedar wrote:
kojikun wrote:
Darth Wong wrote:Mistreatment of homosexuals is immoral because they are suffering, both physically and emotionally, and it is wrong to inflict suffering on others. Discrimination against homosexuals is immoral because it is unjust. But homosexuality is simply a trait, like having blonde hair, and if no more gay (or blonde) children were being born, the world might arguably be a poorer place in terms of diversity, but it's not as if any individual person would be hurt or treated unjustly as a result.
It wouldn't be a tragedy, but its the implication that the world is homophobic and wants us gone thats the tragedy.
No, people want the blond hair gone. They don't want the blonds gone.

THERE'S "humanitarianism" for you..

~ver

kojikun · Post by **kojikun** » 2003-08-07 03:15am

also, verilon, if homosexuality is genetic, how does that explain HOW were attracted to males? in flies i can see chemical responses being responsible, but in humans where is that occuring? it has to be simple like that, you know? youre not born thinking "ooh i like cock in my ass!" because you dont know what a cock is. knowledge of physical form is subjective, you cant hardcode it into people. so there must be something incredibly simple that CAN be hardcoded. like pheromones.

Post by **haas mark** » 2003-08-07 03:18am

kojikun wrote:also, verilon, if homosexuality is genetic, how does that explain HOW were attracted to males? in flies i can see chemical responses being responsible, but in humans where is that occuring? it has to be simple like that, you know? youre not born thinking "ooh i like cock in my ass!" because you dont know what a cock is. knowledge of physical form is subjective, you cant hardcode it into people. so there must be something incredibly simple that CAN be hardcoded. like pheromones.

You say that as if I'm ignorant of that fact. I know this. If that is the same as, say, pedophilia or necrophilia, then there must be something about it that can be changed. But then again, it might be as elusive as something like manic-depressive disorder and schizophrenia. We just don't know. We don't know how or why people have these disorders, or how or why people have sexual orientation that is "out of the norm."

~ver

Post by **Alyrium Denryle** » 2003-08-07 03:25am

kojikun wrote:also, verilon, if homosexuality is genetic, how does that explain HOW were attracted to males? in flies i can see chemical responses being responsible, but in humans where is that occuring? it has to be simple like that, you know? youre not born thinking "ooh i like cock in my ass!" because you dont know what a cock is. knowledge of physical form is subjective, you cant hardcode it into people. so there must be something incredibly simple that CAN be hardcoded. like pheromones.

You dont seem to really get it.

All life is, is a series of chemical and electrical responses to stimulus. Your genetics, and conditioned responses, determine how your body rects to that stimuus.

The Duchess of Zeon · Post by **The Duchess of Zeon** » 2003-08-07 03:39am

Alyrium Denryle wrote: You dont seem to really get it.

All life is, is a series of chemical and electrical responses to stimulus. Your genetics, and conditioned responses, determine how your body rects to that stimuus.

How you interact with your surroundings is not predetermined. The mind is primarily a blank-slate, waiting for information to provide context.