Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Thu, 1 Jul 2004 07:01:22 -0400 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
On Thu, 1 Jul 2004 6:45am, Mary Anne wrote:
>> If we can breed
>> plants in which the concentration of problematic substances is lower,
>> why not do so?
>>
> Because it would bring us back to a religious discussion.
> Basically, we would be playing God because we don't think God did
> it
> right the first time around (make it a little "g", if you prefer) -
> *whenever* that was.
I'm not a believer, but I think the theology of the Abrahamic religions
says that we live in a *fallen* world in which things are *not* as God
wanted them. This is why, if a baby is born with a congenital health
problem, we are not only permitted to try to correct it but have a
positive moral responsibility to do so. The consequences of the Fall
pervade the created order and that's why there is disease, disaster,
etc. Breeding or designing a better spud is not theologically different
from breeding better cattle, and I don't think anyone says *that* is
theologically unsound.
Todd Moody
[log in to unmask]
|
|
|