WGW is right here.
But you do raise an interesting concern.

OK - so you've got two eggs or two embryos in a petri dish and only one can be implanted. One carries a gene for an undesirable characteristic (CF, athsma, whatever: it doesn't matter). Choosing one will mean that the other never comes to birth.

But if your choice is between eggs, then there's noone there to suffer the harm. If it's between embryos, then one was going to be discarded anyway - so, in this case, the world is no worse off than it would be.

The point is this: if your only chance of coming to exist at all is by the chance meeting of a particular sperm and egg - and it is - it's difficult to claim that you've been harmed by not coming to exist at all.
( Enzyme is powered by sunlight, Thu 15 Apr 2010, 15:18, 1 reply, 16 years ago)

The claim is not of harm but of future effect.
I suppose that once you accept that taking action is not going to adversely affect likely futures then everything is fine.
(porkylips looks better as the sun goes down., Thu 15 Apr 2010, 15:26, Reply)