If you read the article,
the point of this procedure is that you take a fertilised egg that would otherwise produce a cripple, and make it produce a non-cripple. Sure, it requires fiddling about in a lab so the kid isn't conceived "naturally", but there's no weeding out of cripple embryos, the cripple embryos just get fixed.
(wellgroomedwookiee is a filthy-minded hobgoblin, Thu 15 Apr 2010, 15:19, 1 reply, 16 years ago)

It will, however, lead to the winnowing out of "undesirable" genes.
Which is a bit of a conceit. Gattaca was a crap film but it did raise a valid point. Who is anyone to decide what should and shouldn't be in our gene pool? Conversely if you can make something "better" do you not have a duty to do so. I'll leave this sort of thinking stuff to Enzyme if it's ok with you. It's too much for my brain and there is no answer really. It's all subjective.
(porkylips looks better as the sun goes down., Thu 15 Apr 2010, 15:24, Reply)

I'm not sure.
If you can avoid unnecessary suffering, you might well have at least a prima facie duty to do so. And as for the winnowing out of undesirable genes: well, there're at least some that it'd be good to lose.
( Enzyme is powered by sunlight, Thu 15 Apr 2010, 16:04, Reply)