There are many people in the public who believe that genetic engineering is going to disrupt the balance between what is morally and ethically wrong and right. Genetic engineering should not continue to be pursued because it is a force that can control society, people are the experiment, and it ensures another eugenic movement. Harvard philosopher, Michael Sandel criticizes genetic engineering in his book, The Case Against Perfection, and professes that this technology is violating the norms of human practices in society, (Sandel, Case Against Perfection). For example in a sport such as swimming, talent is supposed to be notable, but when a swimmer chooses to use steroids the public looks down upon it in a negative way (Saletan). Sandel believes…show more content… Don’t try to control everything,” (Saletan). If genetic engineering were to exist, people would not have great achievements based on pure talents and gifts, these gifts would just be indebted or programmed into the DNA, which would change the moral structure in society’s culture. Another point that many advocates forget about is that the experimenting will be done on humans. Any engineer would say that testing is required for any experiment and the more testing there are the more prototypes made, which means there will be failures. Those failures are people and those people would have to live with the inevitable mistakes that will be made, if they can even survive with those mistakes (Knapp). Social media director of Forbes Editorial describes it as, “A human being whose DNA was altered without consent, who is participating in a scientific experiment without consent, and is, basically, being born into slavery, with their sole purpose in life being a stepping stone to making other people “better,”(Knapp). Although genetic engineering is possible, it does not mean that it is possible to do so without committing immoral acts. Finally, genetic engineering is a version of eugenics through the use of
