PhilosophyBeware lest anyone cheat you through philosophy and empty deceit, according to the tradition of men, according to the basic principles of the world, and not according to Christ. (Col. 2:8)
What about growing certain fruits to turn out different ways (e.g. seedless). Take a watermelon - many people don't want to deal with the seeds, while others say the fruit is more flavorful with the seeds.
Another interesting point.
I don't think it's good that we make fruits and such without seeds. After all, that's how we are able to grow those fruits again.
But i do think there should be more liberty with how we grow fruits than how we grow children. In Japan they also make watermelons square to better stack up. I would hate to think of someone taking such liberties with the creation of children. Perhaps down the road a gay couple will want a child who is genetically engineered to by gay?? It certainly wouldn't end with controlling the gender, and perhaps we should ask the question of where the line would be drawn?
This brings up a related question about hybrid foods being grown and how it relates to...
__________________
Larry Bray
Training for Elder - Reformed Presbyterian Church of Boothwyn, PCA
Boothwyn, PA - http://www.rpcb.org/
All I've seen so far is people make good cases that sex selection can be used for sinful reasons. That doesn't make it inherently sinful. Let's not teach the doctrines of men as the commandments of God.
__________________
Davidius
Husband of Emilia
Member: First Reformed Presbyterian Church of Durham (RPCNA) - Durham, NC
Student: University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, German Literature and Classics
This may explain the old adage about Baptists being Methodists with shoes, and Presbyterians being Baptists who can read. To round out the adage, Lutherans might qualify as Presbyterians who drink to excess, and Episcopalians as Lutherans who know when to say when. - D.G. Hart
Just because somebody wants something doesn't mean they should have it.
If a family wants to be balanced and have equal girls and boys, does that mean that they should have a balanced family?
No, but that’s not my position. My position is that they should have the right to choose to do so. Unless somebody offers good arguments for why they shouldn’t have that right, and it should be illegalized. I have not seen any good arguments for such a position in this thread (at least for countries where a government doesn’t take a totalitarian stance on gender).
Quote:
Originally Posted by larryjf
What if after they have the family they change their minds on the importance of balance?
I fail to see how this is an argument against sex selection.
Quote:
Originally Posted by larryjf
We are not omniscient so we have no way of telling what our future holds. If we choose to have only girls because we live in a culture that looks down on boys...what would happen if in the near future we move to a culture that looks down on girls? Then our whole argument for choosing the gender is thrown out the window.
In many cases of sex selection, it is for the purposes of “family balancing”. Besides, I am merely defending the claim that sex selection should not be made illegal.
Quote:
Originally Posted by larryjf
Say we think a balanced family is the way to go because we think children will end up better socially acclimated. And later studies come out that prove they do worse socially. Once again our reasons for choosing are thrown out the window.
Most of your hypotheticals are instances where the parents choose sex selection for reason x, and later x turns out not to be the case. But this is a simplistic view of sex selection. Parents choose sex selection for many different reasons, and it hardly seems to be the case on the face of it that all of these reasons will turn out to be false. Perhaps they want to have a boy to carry on the family name, and they already have 3 daughters. They still love their daughters, and such a choice says nothing about superiority one way or the other.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Augusta
It is when people move in on manipulating the birth process that I believe they are overstepping their bounds.
If a person is not being harmed, then how are they overstepping their bounds?
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarolinaCalvinist
All I've seen so far is people make good cases that sex selection can be used for sinful reasons. That doesn't make it inherently sinful. Let's not teach the doctrines of men as the commandments of God.
Yes, the reasoning is that because ‘X’ can be used for sinful reasons, ‘X’ should be made illegal. Which doesn’t really follow.
I think Rich’s argument is the best, but that only holds water in places with severe pressure on selecting a certain gender. In the US at least this is not a problem.
__________________
Caleb
Trinity Baptist Church
Spokane, WA
Just out of curiosity for all those who don't think it should be an issue because the Bible does not specify that it is wrong, could the same be said of placing an embryo into a dogs womb? Since the Bible does not specify that it is wrong could it be considered unethical?
Linear Mode
