Interesting discussion here. I don't care what you do with your genes or your kids' genes. Having said that, there's this slippery-slope we get on where we sa

Interesting discussion here. I don't care what you do with your genes or your kids' genes. Having said that, there's this slippery-slope we get on where we say something like "Here's this new thing that gives us X. We've never done it before and we're really not sure what the side effects are, but X is pretty cool! Since other people are doing X, we have to do it as well!" You can run that line of argument with dozens of cutting-edge scientific topics. At the extreme, you end up with some version of "Anything that might make us better than the other guys, we are forced to do -- even if it has terrible consequences" Since that extreme does not work for me, there must be some limiting factor here that we're not talking about. I do not know what that factor is. It does make sense, however, that asking for public funding along these lines doesn't look like a good way to keep the peace. Eugenics wasn't a good idea, was it? Forced sterilization? How about encouraged or paid-for sterilization? Please keep these as rhetorical questions -- the only reason I brought them up is to show that "better humans through genetics" doesn't have a very happy history.