biotechnology

[Lao Tzu]

i'm doing an argumentative report on biotechnology. i am 100% for it but i need to know all the reasons people would oppose it. Biotechnology is a blanket term for using technology to fuck with biology. The Human Genome Project, cloning, designer babies, etc. Genetic Engineering in a nutshell basically.


So far i have found that religious people and environmentalists usually oppose biotechnology & genetic engineering. Who else opposes it and why.

 

[bunnymt]

Most conservatives oppose it. You are arguing for biotechnology? What is your thesis?

bunny

 

[Test boy]

I am for genetic engineering. If I had a 20" penis, the girls would be out of business.

Ooh...that is disgusting.

 

[danielson]

hmmmm arguements against

past mistakes have lead to a increased risk to humans. a genetically engineered brazil nut was withdrawn from sale 1 day before its launch as a toxin was found within the nut, which was harmful to humans....

a food substitue made from crude oil was fed to animals, but this led to an increased cancer incidence in the animals and whoever consumed them

genetic engineering plants and animals narrows the gene pool making a cataclysmic event more likely

we are toying with the code to life that can be argued is divine and can only be fully understood by he who is divine (god)

if someone brings up gene therapy bring up a kid who had an adenovirus attentuated so DNA could be inserted into his cells (forget where or why)....the virus wasnt weakened enough and it killed him (dwell on the horrific effects of the virus such as te oragn swelling and explosion and massive oedema of the body plus high temperature and burning sensation, its what right winger do when they attempt to justify something even though it only happened once or twice )....this only happened once btw

the abiltiy for humans to kill each other is only enhanced by this knowledge

people may seek to pervert this knowledge for evil ways (i.e. using genetics to discriminate etc)

legally patents may be placed on things every human has (the genome, specific chromosomes etc).....american companies LOVE doing this

we could create something that coud kill us (i.e. parastites killed by other animals have a knock on effect on the food chain)

private companies are usually able to undertake such research and spend more money than public/charity teams and as such choose what gets studied, and what gets cured. capatalism may have president over health benefits (i.e. a cure to aids)

 

[Test boy]

So what...can I get a 20" penis?

 

[danielson]

So what...can I get a 20" penis?

probably

dont count on any sensation. or it being able to 'work'.....or it not melting when its near a radiator

 

[Lao Tzu]

Most conservatives oppose it. You are arguing for biotechnology? What is your thesis?

bunny

my main argument is in favor of DNA manipulation. my thesis would probably be something like "DNA manipulation opens the doorway to a world where we can solve many of our problems, and where variety will appear limitless."

Basically i see the opponents of this to be the same type of people who oppose every social revolution due to an addiction to the old way of life, ie people suffering from 'future shock'. No different than the old folks who won't buy a computer.

 

[Lao Tzu]

thats good.

10 points.

7 were about the dangers. 2 were about the rich having a monopoly. however every new technology is dangerous & a plaything of the rich at first. If we had thrown planes out the window in the 20's because they were expensive & dangerous we wouldn't have evolved them to make them cheaper & safer.

hmmmm arguements against

1.past mistakes have lead to a increased risk to humans. a genetically engineered brazil nut was withdrawn from sale 1 day before its launch as a toxin was found within the nut, which was harmful to humans....

2.a food substitue made from crude oil was fed to animals, but this led to an increased cancer incidence in the animals and whoever consumed them

3.genetic engineering plants and animals narrows the gene pool making a cataclysmic event more likely

4.we are toying with the code to life that can be argued is divine and can only be fully understood by he who is divine (god)

5.if someone brings up gene therapy bring up a kid who had an adenovirus attentuated so DNA could be inserted into his cells (forget where or why)....the virus wasnt weakened enough and it killed him (dwell on the horrific effects of the virus such as te oragn swelling and explosion and massive oedema of the body plus high temperature and burning sensation, its what right winger do when they attempt to justify something even though it only happened once or twice )....this only happened once btw

6.the abiltiy for humans to kill each other is only enhanced by this knowledge

7.people may seek to pervert this knowledge for evil ways (i.e. using genetics to discriminate etc)

8.legally patents may be placed on things every human has (the genome, specific chromosomes etc).....american companies LOVE doing this

9.we could create something that coud kill us (i.e. parastites killed by other animals have a knock on effect on the food chain)

10.private companies are usually able to undertake such research and spend more money than public/charity teams and as such choose what gets studied, and what gets cured. capatalism may have president over health benefits (i.e. a cure to aids)

 

[Test boy]

probably

dont count on any sensation. or it being able to 'work'.....or it not melting when its near a radiator

Yep...probably true. Little guys get hard boners easier than ........... It seems that way anyways. It is not unusual to see a guy with a girl and what is obviously a modest boner. Don't see too many monster boners.