I don’t understand. Are you saying there’s some negative impact to allowing people to have children who otherwise couldn’t? What problems do you foresee?
Once humans (and other animals) can be created without parents being involved, there will be many ethical issues.
At what point do they attain human rights? At conception? At "birth" from an artificial womb? What defines "human" in "human rights"? (Can they knock out a few genes and make a sentient creature that is capable of suffering but not human? We have sentient non-humans suffering in factory farms already.) How will we prevent people/corporations/governments/religions from just deciding to create a bunch of people? What does regulation look like in this inevitable future?
I commented above a few of the issues I see. For example, would Lebron James (or any celebrity or person that has genetics that are profitable) be afraid of giving blood for fear of someone making Lebron 2.0 without his permission?
Personally, I foresee breeding programs for armies to create perfect soldiers. I foresee breeding programs for a permanent slave underclass. How can you not see the problems?
Obviously, but this is not so different from "regular" IVF for example. I'd have liked a little bit more explanation from GP about why these particular means go too far for them whereas current fertility treatments don't, instead of just throwing a blanket suggestion of unethicalness out there.
