Designer Babies by Patricia Smith

Designer Babies

by Patricia Smith

“Designer Babies” by Patricia Smith is an article about genetics and how one could choose between different geneses for their child.  Scientists are making discoveries now that can soon lead to have people potentially picking options of traits and characteristics they would want their child to have.  These discoveries can also create baby’s that are free from birth defects, and have genes altered as to remove unwanted conditions. 

In her article, Smith explains both the good and the bad sides of this genetic modification.  The good parts that Smith mentions is that with new advancements scientists will be able to isolate diseases that come from genetic defects and would replace them with healthy genes.  When explaining the opposite side, Smith writes about biotech advocacy groups saying the scientists must be careful because they could cause new genetic abnormalities or that it could even get rid of good traits.  Smith also talks about how several countries like Canada, Australia, France, and Denmark have all passes laws about messing with genes saying scientists can’t alter human genes that can be passed on.

Morally I think depending on the situation altering a baby’s genetics can be completely wrong or sometimes understandable.  For example if a child had the certain disease scientists knew they could get rid of and that it would give the child a much better chance at life, altering it’s genes is understandable.  But when it comes to choosing whether your child is smart, attractive, athletic etc that’s unethical and wrong.  Life is full of imperfections and within ones self we all have things that are our weak points and our strong points.  If everyone had no weak points, or the same strong points, life would be bland.  Daily activities would be monotone and pointless and everyone would be an image of each other.  In my point of view several things could happen if in the future parents could pick and choose their baby’s features.  One would be as said before that eventually everyone would be so closely “manufactured” there would be no difference in personalities.   Another issue that can happen is separating rich and poor people even further.  Let’s say the more attractive you want your child to be, the more expensive it is.  Rich people would be able to “customize” their children however they dreamed but poorer parents would have little to nothing for their child, creating a big separation in classes. 

One moral I try to stand by is that everyone should try their hardest to be accepting of others but also accepting of themselves.  Now all of these kids can no longer be accepting, there would always be that one cool thing they wish they were modified with that they could never have.  They are all like trophies the parents would be carrying around showing who’s the smartest, prettiest, fastest.  I feel like all this genetic modification could create eventually sad children with always more that they don’t have, always aware of who’s best.

Although many of those reasons and examples are long stretches they’re all possible outcomes of messing with baby’s genetic codes.  My position is not 100% set on this debate, but I feel that it all depends on the situation.  Yes if used to save a child’s life, make it worth living I would never stop anyone from pursuing those inventions.  But once it becomes a catalogue of what your child could be that’s where it crosses my morals and where I disagree.

  

Who is to Blame for Romeo and Juliet's Deaths?

Who is to Blame for Romeo and Juliet’s Death?

By Lilith Valentin 811

            In Romeo and Juliet, a play written by William Shakespeare, a boy Romeo and a girl Juliet from two feuding families (the Montague’s and the Capulet’s) meet at a party thrown by Lord Capulet and fall in love.  Soon after meeting they go and marry each other after a late night balcony talk where they both confess their loves for one another.  With many events building up to it, in the end both Romeo and Juliet are dead along with Tybalt, Mercutio, Paris, and Lady Capulet.  There were several reasons for Romeo and Juliet’s deaths, but the ones most responsible were the feuding families.

            One example of why it’s the families’ fault that both Romeo and Juliet died is by thing each other so much that the two lovers were scared to share their happiness.  Therefore Friar Lawrence had to marry them in secrecy.   If not for the conflict with the Capulet and Montague’s both teenagers could have shared their love with their families.  It wouldn’t create a situation that was (and did become) prone to go bad.  There wouldn’t have had this situation of secrecy if the families were on good terms.  At the time of marriage Friar Lawrence says, “Come, come with me, and we will make short work/ for, by your leaves, you shall not stay alone/ Till Holy Church incorporate two in one.” (2.6.35-37).  That excerpt from the play demonstrates how Friar Lawrence had to marry them quickly and privately.  All of these tedious measures were unnecessary if both the Capulet’s and the Montague’s weren’t fighting.

            Another reason the tension is responsible is by forcing Romeo into doing things he didn’t want to.  In act 3 right after Romeo had wedded Juliet he ran into Benvolio and Mercutio (Montague’s) and Tybalt (a Capulet).  “TYBALT/ Romeo… thou art a villain/ ROMEO/… I see thou knowest me not/ TYBALT/ Boy, this shall not excuse the injuries. That thou hast done me/ Therefore turn and draw/ ROMEO/ I do protest I never injured thee/ but love thee better than thou canst devise…” (3.1.62-70).  Here Tybalt challenges Romeo to a dual but when Romeo refuses, Mercutio is the one who ends up fighting Tybalt and is killed doing so.  As a revenge for his cousin, Romeo goes after Tybalt and then kills Tybalt.  When the villagers find out, the Prince gives Romeo 24 hours to leave and never come back.  If Tybalt weren’t so spiteful towards Romeo and his family there wouldn’t have been a fight and Romeo wouldn’t be banished from Verona.  Hearing of Juliet’s (fake) death Romeo returns.  Not knowing she was still living once he sees her lying in the tomb he takes poison he bought from the apothecary and kills himself.

            Lastly, why the families hostility toward each other is the cause of Romeo and Juliet’s death is because of the pressure on Juliet to marry Paris.  Lord Capulet, Juliet’s father, near the middle of the play becomes extremely set on the fact that Juliet must marry Paris.  Unfortunately, Juliet was already married to Romeo.  To avoid marrying Paris and to go meet with the banished Romeo, Juliet drinks a potion given to her by the Friar, which makes her seem dead, but she will awaken in a matter of hours.  When she wakes up, Romeo is by her dead from his own poison, soon to be followed by Juliet (using Romeo’s dagger).  The only reason she was there in the first place was because her father made her marry Paris.  He pushed her saying he wouldn’t acknowledge her as his daughter is she didn’t do as he said, “CAPULET/ Day, night, hour… my care hath been/ To have her matched/… And then to have a wretched puling fool,/ A whining mammet/… you shall not house with me.” (3.5.188-200).  Here Lord Capulet threatens Juliet saying that if she does not marry Paris she will no longer live with him and he won’t provide for her any longer.  Making her agree to marriage becomes a huge part in her upcoming death.

            These examples are only a few of many demonstrating that the vendetta separating the Montague family and the Capulet families are the ones accountable for Romeo’s death and for Juliet’s death.  The love story of the two children of these families in Verona goes through a very eventful couple of days.  In mere hours they go from strangers, to lovers, to husband and wife, to dead.  The beautiful play of Shakespeare explores how fare some would go to love in the most unthinkable ways.