NFL spygate and steroids for racehorses. So it's not like they're not doing incredibly valuable and important work.

Russia or China engineer a human with abilities far beyond normal men? A superman if you will, bred to be a warrior and fight the battles of the 21st century. Will we say no it's not something we can do because of religious dogma and become enslaved or will we meet the challenge and breed our own supermen. What say ye god fearing people that are even against biotechnology that can save lives? Would you concede your beliefs to save your culture?

"Russia or China engineer a human with abilities far beyond normal men? A superman if you will, bred to be a warrior and fight the battles of the 21st century."

Well, obviously the ethical thing to do would be to nuke 'em!

Yep, nuke 'em real good and let G-d sort 'em out.

I seem to remember the sci-fi of my youth being very positive about "genetic engineering." It was less about a race of superwarriors and more about prolonging life.

Anyway, it doesn't matter about your moral compunctions or ethical nausea. If a thing is possible, someone somewhere will do it.

"Russia or China engineer a human with abilities far beyond normal men? A superman if you will, bred to be a warrior and fight the battles of the 21st century."

The US Marines would still whip 'em any day of the week.

welcome our new Genetically Engineered Hybrid Atomo Supermen Overlords!

When I read A Handmaid's Tale years ago, I thought she had jumped the shark. I re-read it recently nodding my head in grim recognition.

So, when I read Oryx and Crake, I figured I'd know just what she was talking about soon enough. And, here we are.

. . . I want my next dog to have opposable thumbs so he can bag his own poop.

And be smart enough to nod or shake his head when I ask him if I can get one more day out of a shirt.

But not be so smart that he knows what being "fixed" means.

so we all have the SAME genes (or pretty close analogs). the bricks are the same, but the houses are different. the religious impulse led to one dark age and it's trying for a second.

Bush mentioned 'human-animal hybrids' in a SotU speech a few years back. As another long-time science-fiction reader, I sat up and said, 'wtf'?! And now, here we are.

I'd like a talking dog, please. And catseye pupils. For me, that is, not the dog.

The real question here is how we as a species have gotten to the position where competition among nations (read: largely arbitrary units of physical geography) could realistically shape the direction that we take as a species.

Employing human genetic engineering as a means to advance a country's economic interests is a little like selling your kidneys to buy better countertops than your neighbors.

It is an approach so small and stupid to a situation so momentous and fundamental that no good can possibly come of it.

They don't need to clone or genetically engineer cancer sniffing dogs. Dogs can be trained to look for certain smells. What a waste of money! What they need is to give us gene therapy so we can grow new teeth and limbs like sharks and ambhibians.

This can all be a little hard to follow - let me get this straight:

- the US is the primary country currently using bioengineered crops, and is fighting trade restrictions to market them and their derivative products in other nations uncomfortable with the technology.

- the US has restrictive laws on biotechnology that involve human tissue, due to concerns driven largely over domestic disagreement over reproductive health issues.

- the US also operates a series of secret and not-so-secret prisons where people are cleverly described in ways that avoid the wording of human rights agreements.

- the US wants to promote a human-animal hybrid non-proliferation treaty, that would ban research into technology that involves mixing human tissue with other organisms, despite the promise for the development of medical treatments that this offers.

Does that basically cover it? Lets see if I can sum this up:

What the US government wants is good, what others want is bad.

I'm not trying to be trite about this, our government doesn't have coherent policies on genetic engineering or on human rights. It seems policy is purely driven by short term wants, and not based on any particular principles, ideals or goals. Taken as a whole, they make no sense.

I have to wonder if the lawyers of the Guantanamo detainees have considered a legal appeal based on the misuse of their client's tissue and genetic material? They might get some traction there.

If they can clean that process up and make it better I'm all for it. Pets are not people.

That if it involves science, Salon is generally as opposed to it as the most blatant Christian fundamentalists are, but for different reasons.