Gene technology threatens new racism: Vatican

[Niels Bohr 72]

Wed Apr 22, 2009 10:19pm EDT By Laura MacInnis

GENEVA (Reuters) - Technology allowing parents to choose the genetic characteristics of their babies threatens to breed new forms of racism, the Vatican told a United Nations race conference on Wednesday.

Pope Benedict earlier this week said the heated U.N. forum, which several Western powers are boycotting to avoid giving legitimacy to criticism of Israel, was an important initiative to confront all forms of modern discrimination.

"The Holy See is also alarmed by the still latent temptation of eugenics that can be fueled by techniques of artificial procreation and the use of 'superfluous embryos'," Archbishop Silvano Tomasi, Vatican observer to the U.N. in Geneva said.

"The possibility of choosing the color of the eyes or other physical characteristic of a child could lead to the creation of a 'subcategory of human beings' or the elimination of human beings that do not fulfill the characteristics predetermined by a given society."

The Israeli-Palestinian conflict has cast a long shadow over the Geneva meeting that formally wraps up on Friday.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad made international headlines on its opening day on Monday when he denounced Israel as a racist state, prompting dozens of delegates to stream out.

Pro-Israeli and Jewish groups had urged the Vatican to boycott the meeting alongside Australia, New Zealand, Germany, Poland, the Netherlands, Canada, and Israel.

But Tomasi said it was important for religious voices to be heard at such forums.

"In the fight against racism, faith communities play a major part," he said.

He also cited concerns that "an increased fragmentation of social relations in our multicultural societies" and the world's economic crisis has made vulnerable people even more so.

(Editing by Louise Ireland)

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

It's certainly a possibility. I don't agree with tinkering with things for cosmetic purposes - but Downs Syndrome? You bet.

Edited April 23, 2009 by Private Pike

[pedroh 21]

would it be racism to alter dna so genetic diseases as diabetes.. or other predisposition?

mhh interesting..

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Well it wouldn't be in the sense of weeding out those diseases - it could be for the people who current have those diseases. Though there are protections in law to deal with discrimination - and lets face it, there is plenty of discrimination to go around already.

That said - the movie Gattaca comes to mind for some reason..

[Nagishkaw 510]

It's certainly a possibility. I don't agree with tinkering with things for cosmetic purposes - but Downs Syndrome? You bet.

[Bobby+Umit 161]

Well, eventually, if you weed out gene defects, there will be no one with the defects, so I don't believe it would lead to discrimination to do this.

Now - if people change their hair to blond, eyes to blue, that may cause something (but - people all ready do this now, hair coloring, contacts)

As Private Pike says, there all ready are laws for this (discrimination). (and yet, they are still broken...)

If it could prevent another child to be born with defects, it would be worth it imo.

[Peikko 1,575]

I don't think it should become a question of parent's 'choosing' desirable characteristics (even if that were at all possible, which, seems very, very far off being true) but rather a question of attempting to eliminate conditions that cause immense suffering during the lifetimes of those born with these genetic conditions.

That said, I heard that the whole things is proving a lot more complicated than originally hoped with more genetic coding being involved than was once suspected.

[fozzie 41]

Well it wouldn't be in the sense of weeding out those diseases - it could be for the people who current have those diseases. Though there are protections in law to deal with discrimination - and lets face it, there is plenty of discrimination to go around already.

That said - the movie Gattaca comes to mind for some reason..

Thats always my fear when we start talking genetic tampering. I understand the temptation to eradicate genes that make us seceptible to certain deisease but it its a slippery slope. Right now we might say oh we only want to do it in these circumstance, but gradually the boudaries will be pushed further and further until we are picking every single detail.

Evolution needs randomness. The human races ability to adapt to the changing climate conditions depends on evolution.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I don't think it should become a question of parent's 'choosing' desirable characteristics (even if that were at all possible, which, seems very, very far off being true) but rather a question of attempting to eliminate conditions that cause immense suffering during the lifetimes of those born with these genetic conditions.

That said, I heard that the whole things is proving a lot more complicated than originally hoped with more genetic coding being involved than was once suspected.

Yeah - even leaving aside the ethical implications of say... cloning - I thought it was interesting that a cloned cat could look different to the original and have completely different markings.