On Mon, 7 Jul 2003, Trei, Peter wrote: > Its when we get to 'fixes' to behaviour and personality > that things start to get very hairy. I fear that those in > power will use genetic engineering as they have used > every other tool at their disposal - weapons, states, > laws, and governments - to maintain their position at > the expense of the overall welfare of the species, by > allowing improvements only to their own descendents, > while requiring changes to those out of power which > make it harder for them to change their status. > > One scenario: > > "Mr & Mrs Smith: The No Child Should Fear Act of > 2015 requires that your proposed son have the > 'bullying' gene deleted if he is to attend publicly > funded schools. This is similar to the old requirements > for vaccination - we don't want your son to endanger > other children, do we?
I have long believed that the constitution of the United States (through an ammendment) should include protection against involuntary mental tampering. It should, for instance, be a constitutional right for a child not to take their Ritalin, or for an insane man not to take his meds in order to stand trial (a recent court case whose outcome I do not know). Along this line, perhaps a more general anti-tampering ammendment could include protection against the coercion that you describe above. I feel that no parent should be forced to alter their child in any way - before or after the birth. ----- John Kozubik - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.kozubik.com