BIOLOGY 1010

GIBSON JOHNSON

Eugenics

Sir Francis Galton described eugenics as, the study of all agencies under human control which
can improve or impair the racial quality of future generations. The exact definition of eugenics is the
study of methods of improving genetic qualities by selective breeding, especially as applied to human
mating. The idea behind eugenics is that one could choose the exact genes of someones offspring. If
they wanted their child to have blue eyes and blonde hair, the changes would be made in the genes and
that child would be born with blue eyes and blonde hair. The controversy here is that some people feel
that it is wrong to not let nature take its course. Some find it morally incorrect to play what they would see
as the role of God, and artificially create the DNA of an individual. Others would say that this is a grand
scientific breakthrough, that with eugenics, we will be able to rid the world of characteristics that make a
human weak or unattractive.
Someone who is for eugenics could make a very strong case as to why we should apply it in our
lives. I believe that it is natural for a human being to want to take control of the situation he or she is in.
Having a child is something that we as humans to this point have had no control over. We do not know if
the child will have problems. If he will be tall, or short, brown hair or blonde. And with eugenics, we as
humans are capable of taking over something as significant as birth. We can influence a humans life
before that human has even developed a brain. Many human beings would see this as a positive. In an
article called, Good Eugenics, Larry Arnhart makes the case that eugenics can be used in a positive
way. We allow parents to make such reproductive decisions because we assume that most parents will
be motivated by a desire for parental care that considers the best interests of their children. Using
governmental coercion to force a decision on them would be bad eugenics. Allowing them to make their
own decisions based on the best available information and their natural desire for a healthy family life is
good eugenics.

I believe that eugenics is morally incorrect. In argument to Larry Arnhart and his view on good
eugenics, I say that human beings should not be trusted to make the decisions that God himself has
already made. I believe in a God that has a plan for all of us, and eugenics, in a way, makes it seem like
humans are trying to take Gods place in this plan and recreate a plan of our own. When it comes down to
the child being created, who is to decide, based simply on personal values, what is right and what is
wrong for that child? We have proof in history of what happens when a human tries to play the role of a
God. During World War II, Adolf Hitler had a vision of a perfect Germany, and eventually a perfect world.
One without undesirable traits such as homosexuality or down-syndrome or for even being Jewish, and
instead a race of the superior breed of only blonde hair and blue eyed individuals. This idea led to one
of the darkest events to ever take place in history known as the holocaust. Hitler wanted to play God, and
as a result, killed millions of people. Who is to decide that down syndrome, or anything else viewed as
undesirable, is a negative trait? I believe in a bigger plan, one in which I will have trials in life and will be
able to grow from these trials and eventually become a better person because of it. I cant imagine what I
would be like if I had been genetically modified in order to avoid some of these trials that I have been
given.
In closing, I can see as to why eugenics would be appealing to the public. Many people dont
have the same beliefs that I have and see the world a different way. But these differences are what
makes being a human so special. And with eugenics, we are no longer embracing these things that make
us unique, but instead we are modifying them in order for the future generation to receive all of the
positive traits that their ancestors saw fit. Being able to change the genetic make-up of a baby is enticing
and can be seen as very beneficial in some situations. But something important that I think we need to
focus on is Charles Darwins original idea behind Natural Selection. Once we begin genetically modifying
our children, we have begun Artificial Selection, and put Darwins theories behind us. If there is one thing
we can learn from nature, it is that the strong survive but that everything has its purpose. And it is my
personal belief that we as human beings have no right to intervene in the grand scheme of things to make
everyone the fittest of the fit.