It's worth noting that there's a huge difference between the eugenics of the past and the eugenics enabled by modern IVF and other genetic technologies. Eugenic

It's worth noting that there's a huge difference between the eugenics of the past and the eugenics enabled by modern IVF and other genetic technologies. Eugenics of the past primarily reduced the capabilities and rights of people, while the technologies described in the article increase capabilities. Eugenics in the past resulted in discrimination and genocide, but modern eugenics is simply allowing parents to choose their child's genes. I don't see any issue with this. Others have pointed out that this technology will be available to the rich first, but this is a problem with economics, not with the technologies. Economic inequality has gigantic, far-reaching concerns, many of which have nothing to do with genetics. We should fix economic inequality, not its symptoms. Hampering genetic research because it exacerbates a symptom of economic inequality doesn't fix economic inequality, it just creates a separate problem. Of course, there are some places where giving some people capabilities allows them to harm the capabilities of others. Genetic testing for jobs, for example. But these concerns are largely off-base because the science doesn't actually back up that genetic testing for jobs would help the employer. It's a problem without an incentive to cause it.