No Flu Vaccines for Creationists pt. 2

A few years ago . . . Of Cabbages and Kings wrote the following when we were all afraid of bird flue . . .

"No one wants bird flu to turn into a pandemic but if it does, I kind of hope it strikes first at the creationism and "intelligent design" folks not lethally mind you, just enough to put them in bed for a few days so when their heads clear they might wonder. You see, the pandemic, whether it comes or not, is living proof of evolution. In fact, influenza viruses are superb examples of how evolution works in quick time."

As I wrote at the time:

I have to agree with this. No vaccines or anitbiotics of any kind should be given to folks who don't believe in evolution. If evolution were false, there would be no need for new antibiotics to replace penicillin or amoxicillin since these organism would not evolve resistances to anitbiotics through the mutation and survival of the fittest processes. For the same reasons, flu shots wouldn't have to be updated every year if evolution were false and therefore one shot at anytime should be sufficient.

Let's see these people put their health where their beliefs are.

Recent work by the CDC further validates the evolutionary process, by tracing the genetic history of the new flu strain. I still believe the other statements above even though there is no vaccine for the recent flu outbreak at this time(which really isn't swine flu despite having that time), and there may not be one developed in time for the Northern Hemisphere flu season. If you don't believe in evolution, you shouldn't be allowed a shot. It's a great way to ration them out and also weeds the religious whack job christianists out of the populations.

(Poor spellers and people who blog drunk should not be prevented from obtaining future vaccines though.)

The Slope Gets a Bit More Slippery

A British clinc recently obtained permission to screen embryos for a COSMETIC defect. Screening features to date have focused on congenital defects. Now this specific cosmetic defect can be screened for, and there likely soon will be other cosmetic defect screening tests.

Once we start doing this, there really is no bright line between cosmetic and athletic/eugenic screening tests. If you have have enough money, you'll be able to create the perfect embryo from the egg and sperm of you and your partner. Even if such procedures are banned here, China and other nations don't share "our" values a and will proceed with such research. Western doctors will look the other way when pregnant women begin showing up for pre-natal care they weren't aware of needing to perform in advance, much the way western doctors treat the side effects of liver transplants on Westerners who receive their new kidneys from Chinese prisoners etc.

It just seems like the the slope is getting steeper. While I may like where it's going, not everyone will. And our society really does not debate the cultural impact of these technologies in a sober, reflective manner.

And as I've mentioned before, once technology like this becomes widely available, those with the money and foresight to jump on it first, my succeed in permanently embedding a social strata alien to America's national DNA.

Does it matter what the Pope thinks about Biotech?

Obviously the Pope's opinion is wrong, especially his comments on artificical insemination for infertile couples (doesn't that go against God's command to "be fruitful and multiply" - of course people like Benedict don't really use logic). Additionally, the Pope is wrong and Andrew Sullivan right on gay marriage - if you're pro-marriage you allow gays to have civil union because it would provide the same social benefits to and from these couples that married people receive.

But does it even matter that he has an opinion? He is not the head of Christendom, only Catholicism (which recently has been seeking to reconcile with many of the protestant denominations). Aside from Catholics and christianists, do we even care?Most Europeans seem to ignore him. And what about the Chinese who have no cultural connection to the Abrahamic faiths (Judaism, Christianity and Islam)? It's unlikely they would respond to his opinion either.

Additionally, the entire protestant movement was based on the idea that the Catholic church was too dogmatic and didn't allow others to interpret Christianity as they saw fit. So there's really no reason for him to pay much attention to him since the Anglican Church, to which I belong, does not agree with him.

Designer Babies in the UK

At the end of the day I completely support this. The individual and social benefits to eliminating genetic diseases such as diabetes, parkinsons, alcholism etc. are enormous.

I'd love to have my future children partially designed to eliminate hereditary diseases. That's a no brainer.

Unintended Social Consequences & Controversies of This Technology

Would I use this technology to enhance their intelligence and athletic ability - of course, what responsible parent wouldn't want their child to have every possible advantage. This is more controversial because thousands(millions?) of individuals making individual decisions for similar reasons can cause an unintential social movement. Such genetic enhancement runs counter to our American ideals of fair play (witness our laws against performance enhancing drugs for athletes).

What about the ethics of deleting a gay gene, deaf gene or genes that make you fat? Parts of our society would do this without blinking. But other parts of our society(beyond the christianists) will have severe issues with this? E.g., won't deaf culture die out and should it (which is a huge issue)?

Depending on how far such technology progresses, it also has has the potential to cement the position of those at the top and eliminatig the eternal goal of meritocracy and social mobility. Without the last two, our Democratic-Capitalist society will eventually collapse due to revolts and possible revolutions - they'll be slow in coming, but they'll come. And it won't just be our nation, it will occur in other nation where the same technology is available and utilized.

Italian Government Forced 13-year-old to have an abortion

Turning a hypothetical government ban on abortion on its head: The Italian government is forcing a 13-year-old to have an abortion. This is a true life cautionary tale of what can happen when we the people consent to let the government have control over reproductive decisions.

Banning abortion is just the first step on the slippery slope of giving all control over reproduction to the government. Laws regulating who is allowed to reproduce in this country were passed at the hight of the American Eugenics movement in the early 20th Century. As a side note, the Nazi Regime obtained much information on forced sterilization etc. from American States that had passed Eugenics laws already.

If I were a stronger pro-lifer, I might be more concerned that banning abortion in the U.S. would be just the first step towards eventually mandating abortions for specified categories people. Think of a dystopia even more twisted than Brave New World, 1984, or modern-day China.

And of course, this happens in China too, but in a Western nation?