Prometheus and ethical review

Men deny that God exists so that they can play the role themselves; this is the heart and soul of all atheism and false religion. It's also the 'theology' behind genetic engineering.

Quotes and comments;

A. "The J. Craig Venter Institute says they have succeeded in creating the first living organism with a completely synthetic genome.
The team also added panic code that would kill the organism if it left the lab, and took part in a bioethical review before the project." [1.]

- An 'ethical' review by people who can't define ethics is comical. Evolutionary materialism cannot provide people with a foundation for ethics; and in fact denies that ethical truth exists. These reviews are nothing more than PR exercises... the process gone through to deflect public fears and criticism.

B. “It’s part of an ongoing process that we’ve been driving, trying to make sure that the science proceeds in an ethical fashion, that we’re being thoughtful about what we do and looking forward to the implications to the future,” Venter said.

- Venter has no idea what ethics even is, so how can do things ethically? There is no way to define ethics on a materialist basis. (The only way you can have absolute ethics is to have an absolute law giver. i.e. God.) This is a joke.

Science is an abstraction; therefore 'science' can't proceed ethically or unethically. It's people who engage in ethical (moral) behavior. It's people who violate standards. The idea these people can 'ethically' manage what they're doing is like asking Prometheus to write his own ethical code. I'm sure he went through a similar 'review' as the Venter group. (Wink, wink.)

They might be 'looking forward' to the implications of what they're doing, but they have no idea what those implications will be. (I might add that they're representing the entire human race in their activities; whether they want to admit it or not. Every human being on the planet will likely be affected by this new industry. The question is this; what right do they have to play with the fate of every human being who is now alive or will ever be alive? Maybe no one since Adam has had such a heavy weight on his shoulders. So of course they're going to say it's all safe; and that only positive results will incur. Nothing bad will ever happen... and if they do it won't be their fault.)

The trouble here (and the fear I have) is that there is no way to know how dangerous these 'experiments' are. These people can talk about safety all they want, but there's no way to know what the dangers are. There is no way to know what all this genetic engineering will lead to. I'm against it because there's no need for it. It's a huge risk that's unnecessary to take.

Notes;
1. Venter Group Plagiarizes Genetic Code Creation/Evolution Headlines 05/22/2010
'Live Science headlined the story, “First Live Organism with Synthetic Genome Created.” The word “created” was emphatic in the article; “the J. Craig Venter Institute says they have succeeded in creating the first living organism with a completely synthetic genome.”
2. 'It almost sounds like the lab created something entirely new from scratch – “artificial life.” New Scientist even used religious overtones, dubbing it an “Immaculate Creation.” [see above]
3. For what it's worth; I oppose the creation of 'artificial' life. I have an open mind with respect to the use of genetics to repair mutations. i.e. the attempt to reconstruct unmutated code. (This process involves the assumption human code was once perfect; but has now become rather badly damaged.)