Gene For Homosexuality example essay topic

In the world today, medicine brings together science, faith, and values most clearly in its complexity and necessity. An example would include homosexuality. Science has developed over the years and is now starting to manipulate the human mind, body and spirit. Scientists that are now working with DNA and gene therapy have identified the genes for homosexuality and have also discovered a way to eliminate it from fetuses by altering genes before birth so that homosexuality can be eradicated from humans eventually and permanently. Many different religions see homosexuality as a sin, psychologists see it as abnormal behavior and many governments have declared it illegal and punishable. I myself do not believe in changing the human genes to eradicate a sexual preference.

I would not advocate this procedure for members of my family or friends who are having babies, and / or for a society as a whole. There are many reasons as to why I do not agree to the procedure of gene therapy eradicating homosexuality from humans eventually and permanently. One reason that I do not agree with the procedure is because I believe it would eliminate the freedom of sexual preference throughout our society. As Thomas Jefferson stated in 'The Declaration of Independence,' 'We hold these truths to be self- evident: that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness' (314).

If we are told that we have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, then we should have the right to live with the homosexuality gene and have the right to sexual preference. No one should have to give up that freedom. A freedom that homosexuals would most likely consider a source of happiness. Homosexuals are happy with their sexual preference and should not be condemned for it. Sexual preference is not showing good or evil. It is a way of life.

Another reason is that by finding a gene for homosexuality and eliminating it from fetuses and from humans is a way of tampering with nature. I believe that if the gene was put in a human, it was put there for a reason. God and nature placed it there. By taking the gene out you are changing life from the way God made it.

I think that this is morally wrong. It goes against all laws of evolution and nature. Science is not always good and scientists do not always do experiments for the good of the people. Stephen Jay Gould stated 'My greatest unhappiness with most popular presentations of science concerns their failure to separate fascinating claims from the methods that scientists use to establish the facts of nature. ' (276). I think that taking a gene from a fetus is wrong.

By taking the homosexuality gene out of a fetus, a person is taking part of that baby's identity. That baby has no choice in the matter just as when a parent chooses to get an abortion. The baby cannot say don't do that to me or try to fight for it's freedom to live and live with happiness. 'Isn't this like condemning Jesus because his unique God-consciousness and never-ceasing devotion to God's will precipitated the evil act of crucifixion?' (King 342).

Everyone has the right to live a happy life. That right should not be taken away from us just because it means loving someone of the same sex. Not taking out the homosexuality gene, we are allowing everyone the right to freedom and happiness. I think that by not doing this gene therapy it would make for a happier and more perfect society as a whole.

We would not be able to complain of a society that has no or little freedoms. We all want a more perfect society. But not everyone can be perfect. 'The craving for virtue goes beyond the debate over whose values are best - traditional families or single parents, gays or straights, Jews or Christians, black or white.

It now seems painfully clear to most Americans that none of the traditional institutions is doing the job. Parents are absent or busy' (Fineman 30). There is only one absolute and that is good character (Fineman 30). I think that we should just accept the ways of people's living.

As Martin Luther King Jr. Said 'Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection' (341). We shouldn't try to change people.

We need to live with what we were given in life and try to make the best of it.