--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Doug Pensinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Eugenics is a social philosophy. I don't think that if I have six > offspring and all of them are the same sex and I choose the sex of > the seventh to be the opposite sex that that amounts to a social > philosophy. > It amounts to freedom of choice, one of the principals this country > was founded upon.
Of course, but your choice has implications that affect others - to say nothing of your child. Are you saying that if the "free choice" of American parents results in a generation that is born 75% female and 25% male, that you would have no problem with that? (And women say that they can't find any good men today!) And that this would not be an appropriate area for public intervention? It also raises the question of what rights do unborn children have. Are you o.k. with parents aborting children that will have a tendency towards homosexuality? Or of only selecting embryos for implantation that have blond hair or above-average intelligence? Or what about only selecting embryos that have below-average intelligence? The ironic thing is that I just received word today that the pro- choice government of Tony Blair is moving today to ban gender- selection abortions in the UK. But I guess that that the UK wasn't founded on freedom of choice, eh? (Magna Carta and John Locke anyone?) To me, its a shame that the pro-choice extremists in this country have turned the United States into a place where the Chinese come to engage in a practice that even the communists have banned back in their own country... JDG _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
