Check the second half of my post; I agree with the stance you elegantly phrased as society has to evaluate behaviors independent of whether they are partially genetically based.
Certainly: it's the behaviour that is to be accepted, and the cause is not a direct issue.
Genetic tests could then warn of some predisposition to unacceptable behaviour: and maybe suggest a 'cure', or alleviation.
It's an awkward decision, still: if you know someone is basically geared to behave in a certain way, and is acting - quite literally - unnaturally if they do not, then I do see some difficulty in punishing that behaviour if we have no way of blocking or treating the genetic component. Then we would be saying, in effect: "We know that you are driven to do these things, and that that behaviour is not entirely in your power to alter, but we will punish you as though it were"...
I agree. It shouldn't be used to excuse a crime (defined as unacceptable to the point of illegality - generally, harming something or someone, physically, mentally or economically). Nor, perhaps, should it excuse - say - genetically-induced laziness, or a tendency to break a marriage after the birth of a child due to some strange genetic repulsion from commitment.
But do you see the dilemma? If you understand the cause of behaviour, and cannot treat it - how is it then truly justifiable to punish it? If it is, then is it justifiable to abort any foetus showing such tendencies ASAP, because you will probably not be able to control its unacceptable behaviour as an adult? Is that better than allowing an embryonic paedophile to grow and commit his crimes, knowing that he'll ruin others lives - and only then be punished, but won't change?
As I questioned you earlier - if you know your unborn baby will be a criminal, his behaviour unacceptable [whatever that includes - to you], would you abort? Could you? What if such urges are probable in him, and might 'only' torment him but never find release?
<edit> not aimed at you... but what if genetics indicated that the child would grow up to be homosexual? or a demolib? or both?? <g>
I don't want to see that level of abortion... even I blench. Not to mention the horrific level of state or societal investigation and control which would be required.
The only alternative I see - once we have this level of knowledge - would be genetic manipulation, to prevent such genes activating, or replace them, or remove them, or whatever... o brave new world, that hath such people in it.
And of course quis custodiet ipsos custodies - who rules on the genes?
And who pays the piper? if we can ever work at this level- and IMO we will, eventually - then watch for the uberchildren of the rich, bred to be better in every way. A new hereditary elite looms? Or will ultimate warriors overthrow them?
...this one could run and run. |
