Genetic Altering and Its Infinite Possibilities

Although genetic altering could help to cure many of the world’s diseases, it would ultimately cause more problems than it would solve. In Brave New World, the seemingly perfect society is full of people who have been genetically altered to work and live in conditioned areas of the world. They live without diseases, attachment, or basically any feelings. So, what could go wrong?

Genetic altering could rid the world of fatal diseases like cancer and AIDS, and could give people longer lives and more opportunities. People would not have to face every day knowing they only have a ceratin amount of time to live, or have to see a loved one slowly lose their life. Genetic altering people to rid them of disease could change the world we live in as we know it. But would it ultimately be for the good? At the start, ridding people of disease will give everyone longer lives. Slowly, however, as the lives of people grow longer and the people of our planet continue to repopulate, our world will grow smaller. Overpopulation, starvation, and poverty will become more of a problem than it already is today. With more people on the planet, and longer lives than ever, those who are unable to keep up with the changing world will be dragged under the new civilization. They will be left on the streets, without diseases yes, but starving and poor.

This would also lead to a record-breaking growth between the social classes. With Darwinism coming into effect, those who cannot keep up with society will fall behind and be lost. The population of the world’s homeless will sky rocket while the rich grow richer. Cities will drown in poverty, leading to out breaks and riots in the streets. The genetic altering of people would do a lot more to this world than cure diseases or let parents chose the eye color of their child. There is also the issue of the cost. Who would pay for it, the government or the family? If it is the government, a limit on the spending would have to be created in order to keep a balance. And also, who would chose which families would receive the chance to alter their children? If the family were to pay, than only the rich and well-off would be able to. This would again create a growth in the distance of the social classes. If only the rich can alter their children, than their children will ultimately be better, leaving the children of the poor behind in the world.

I understand that this does give many parents the opportunity they did not previously have to conceive a child. It opens up a new world of possibilities for those who are unable to start a family. "No politician wants to get between a childless couple and the doctors who offer an answer to their prayers" (Gibbs). In an article found in Time magazine, Nancy Gibbs brought up the argument of where the line should be drawn in the new found world on genetic altering. "Science has given us childbirth miracles. Now we need laws to create some boundaries."

Many aspects come into the process of creating these boundaries. Religion is huge. It is believed that a child who is genetically altered loses their soul, and therefor, is hardly human. It is messing with nature and what God has intended and stepping in the balance of the world. Many would argue that it’s not right to create a child through science because it is not natural. Children should be born through parents, two humans, not scientists and their test tubes. There are so many different aspects coming into the decision of the boundaries, that it would be next to impossible to create them.

Another positive aspect of genetic altering, however, is that if parents can chose the physical appearance of their child, they would also be able to chose their race, leaving no one in the minority. This would eliminate racism. A world without racism would contain less conflicts between its citizens, and everyone would be the best. At least everyone would consider themselves the best. In the novel Brave New World, each social group considers themselves the best, based solely on childhood conditioning. However, none of these citizens know anything of the other groups of people. This creates great ignorance. In a world where everyone is superior, great pride lives along side its citizens. There is no superiority if there is no one, or no group, under who or what is the best. If everyone is the best, who does everyone consider the worst? Eliminating race from the factors of the minority, what new factors will emerge as the cause for racism? These new factors could be worse than the ones we are living with today; a new racism.

So we as a world society must decide what is better: a world rid of disease, or overpopulation, poverty, and new forms of racism. What would you chose?