First Proposition

Resolution - THS the genetic modification of human embryos

Model - This house being the Canadian government would encourage and allow further research
and implementation of genetic engineering on human embryos. Genetic engineering being ​the
deliberate modification of the characteristics of an organism by manipulating its genetic material,
in this case altering it as to deter medical abnormalities, or for simple cosmetic effects. Research
would first have to be conducted on animal embryos to accurately log effectiveness and safety.
Once passing requirements, research and testing will then be conducted on willing pregnant
participants before being released to the general market as a consumer good.

1st contention

● Humans have been genetically modifying the life around us for thousands of years. The

food we eat, the pets we have, and the crops we grow are all products of genetic

engineering. Our primitive ancestors recognized that by selectively breeding life to

produce desirable traits, we were able to increase the quality of life for all. Genetic

engineering of life has led to breakthroughs in medicine, eradications in disease, and

ultimately the advanced and complex society we live in today. If genetic engineering on

the life around us has yielded so much good, then wouldn’t genetically modifying

ourselves do the same? Wouldn’t selectively picking desirable traits to make us stronger,

smarter, and better ultimately lead to a much higher quality of life for all? Well this was

proven true when on May 5th 2001 the world's first of 30 genetically modified babies

were born . Each one of the mother's eggs had a defect that prevented the mother from

conceiving. After a revolutionary medical procedure that involved the genetic

modification of the egg, the mothers were able to give birth to 30 healthy children, many
 of them who are our age right now leading healthy young lives. Side proposition doesn’t

want to ban such revolutionary procedures but instead foster and encourage them.

Imagine how many lives could be brought to this world and saved if these practices were

widespread and well developed. Genetic Modifications save lives, as in the case of two

years ago when a baby who was bound to be born with a hereditary heart disease was

genetically modified, and ultimately born perfectly normal. This is the next breakthrough

in medicine, the next barrier that we must overcome to achieve a strong, healthy and

intelligent path for the human race.

2nd contention

● But genetic modification doesn't just have medicinal applications, but also personal and

societal ones. My partner will go much more in depth with this but I would just like to do

a quick overview. Genetic modifications also encompass cosmetic and aesthetic effects

on the embryo. Parents, if they so wish, will be able to determine the colour of their

child's hair, eyes, and skin. They will be able to pick straight or curly, and other bodily

features. They will even be able to determine the gender.This aspect of genetic

engineering will be treated as a market and consumer good, a topic that my partner will

elaborate on.

Third contention

● Let's further delve into the medicinal implications of genetically modified babies. Genetic

modification of babies has been predicted to increase the lifespan of the child by close to

30 years. This is due to the fact that all damaging genes containing disease or illness will
 be wiped out before birth, allowing for nothing but healthy genes. It is much more likely

that you will die from natural old age, which is a product of wear and tear of your organs

over decades, instead of an untimely death due to disease or illness. It is also much more

likely that your bloodline will also not carry the negative genes as they would have been

wiped out from the modification process. You can be rest assured that your kids and

future generation will have a bright, long, healthy future ahead of them

2 Proposition

I would first like to clash with some of the point side opposition has addressed, then address

some contentions of my own.:

Clash!

I will now delve into my own contentions, one being the societal effects of genetic engineering

and the other being its market applications.

Build On Second Contention

● Genetic modification can be used for more commercial things then saving lives, like

altering the appearance of the child. You can pick its skin, hair and eye colour. Its hair

type. Even its gender. This further emphasizes how side proposition does indeed want to

market this technology, allow the parents to select and choose what they want for ​their

baby. There's nothing unethical about this, the baby isn’t harmed and either way it had no

choice in its features. There are no particular negatives to this process, besides the off

chance of an accident in the procedure. Opposers of Genetic Modifications like these see

it as unnecessary and “playing god,” as if this were a bad thing. Genetic Engineering

would be the very definition of intelligent design, producing the best outcome from a

variety of choices based on personal preference. Genetic Engineering seems the surest

way of advancing the human race. Why should we limit ourselves when we are capable

of expanding our people to new heights and potential? Denial of Genetic Engineering

really stems from a denial of change, people who oppose it think that things have always

been through natural conception methods, and therefore genetic engineering is bad for the

sole fact that it provides an alternate to this method. They are scared of the change this

may induce on society, and overlook the overall benefits of human progress As the

human race we should aim for our prolonged existence and success. Genetic Engineering

on ourselves seems the surest way of guaranteeing this. It is best to view Genetic

Engineering as enhanced and sped up evolution. Evolution of the human condition is

bound to happen, but why should we have to wait millions of years to “​naturally​” cure

autism or asthma. The future is now, and we shouldn't try to impede on it.
● There is no doubt that accessible genetic engineering will have massive effects on our

society and us as a species. Admittedly, for a time, there will be a divide between those

who are the products of genetic modification and those who are aren't. The procedure will

be highly expensive and may be seen as luxury only the rich can afford. However this

will be temporary, especially if the market is leading genetic modification. New

procedures, items, and shenanigans are always expensive. It is only after prolonged

research and development does the price go down, and it soon becomes available to

everyone. The very first cell phone was $3995 in 1982, the equivalent of $9600 today.

Now, everyone has a cell phone, with the average price being $550. The point being, the

market has a tendency to make products, faster, cheaper, and better over time. We as side

proposition don’t see why this won’t apply to genetic engineering. With enough time and

research, genetic engineered embryos will soon be a product everyone will be able to

enjoy and benefit from. ​No ​socio economic classism will stem from genetic engineering;

as you will not be barred from it due to cost.

● Yet one of the most common arguments against Genetic Engineering is the possibility of

it affecting intelligence. In a world where automation is slowly taking over labour

intensive jobs, skilled and educated sectors seem like the only path towards a secure

career. Parents already influence and effect what career their kids have. This includes

saving up for college, or putting their kids in programs related to a specific career

outcome. Affecting the intellect of your child can be seen as an enhanced version of this,
 allowing you child to compete in a job market that demands more and more from its

applicants. Genetic Engineering would allow parents to directly be able to increase the

likelihood of success and well being in a child's life. It will open up new jobs that humans

could arguable perform better than A.I. In time we could make babies designed to go into

space, to research in different environments. Not to mention that more people smart

enough to become doctors and engineers greatly contributes to the advancement of

humanity and its capabilities.

1st Contention

● Genetic Engineering is simply a way for parents to alter their child in a way they believe

will have a positive impact on its life. We already do this in a social context. Parents

impose morals, religion and education on their child. Parents are already altering their

children by instilling these values, all in the hopes that they will better the child's life.

Genetic engineering is just taking this premise down to the genetic level and allowing the

parent to have a greater impact on the child's life by ensuring the healthiest outcome

possible. And that's what every parent wants, a happy healthy child. In a 2004 study by

the Guttmacher Institute, 13% of abortions were due to possible health problems the fetus

may experience. That's One hundred nine thousand, ninety-nine lives lost. One hundred

nine thousand ninety-nine lives that could have been safely brought into this world had

genetic engineering been a widespread practice. That's One hundred nine thousand
ninety-nine lives a year. Genetic Engineering of these embryos would allow them to be

brought safely into the world, allowing the parents to enjoy and raise the healthy family everyone dreams

of.