Welcome to our first Dialogue here at Veracities!
The format is simple. In response to a prompt from the moderators, our contributors will each provide an opening statement. These will be published together, along with comments from the moderators highlighting points of contention. Then our contributors will go back and forth, with new additions to this introductory post summarizing the debate and raising new points (including interesting arguments from the comments section) after each round. This will continue until a natural conclusion is reached. New posts will appear on Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays.
To get the ball rolling I (David Severa) have written both sides of this debate, as Libertes and Precautiones, but in the future we hope to offer discussions between many different contributors.
If you have a topic you’d like to discuss (especially if you have someone to argue with!) please let us know. We want to host debates on a variety of subjects.
We hope you find our Dialogues both entertaining and informative. If you have suggestions or criticisms, or just wish to swear undying loyalty to one or both of us, please contact us on the site, at our Tumblr, or at firstname.lastname@example.org.
– David Severa & argumate
Should it be legal for parents to use genetic engineering to alter the intelligence or personalities of their future children?
Few developments have excited the scientific world in recent years like CRISPR, a new technique for editing genes with a precision and ease never before possible. Already experiments to genetically engineer human embryos with the hope of eradicating heritable diseases have been made and more attempts will follow. Unlike state-led 20th century eugenics, human genetic engineering may be pursued primarily by prospective parents hoping to improve the lives of their children, most importantly by attempting to modify their minds on a biological level. Should it be legal for parents to use genetic engineering to alter the intelligence or personalities of their future children?
Arguing against a ban is Libertes, and arguing for a ban is Precautiones.