You seriously don't see a difference between animals and people 
For the sake of a polite discussion I can certainly see the difference. What I don't get is that those that do see a difference seem to feel totally comfortable manipulating animals for optimum performance but have the heebie-jeebies about the possibility that serious, debilitating, and often early-in-life fatal disabilities might be remediated if not actually cured.
For the purpose of stimulating discussion: did $deity make the animals any less perfectly than $deity made the humans? (Watch out when answering - the issue of humans being made in the image of $deity - regardless of how you interpret that phrase - is not in play.)
The two can not be separated. "Well they have it, is it so bad that they are at least doing something with it?" Yes, yes it is, it stems from the fact they have it in the first place.
Seems some folks are so wrapped around the axle that they cannot even play high school debate team.
1. At least one atheist and one pagan in this thread who are opposed to abortion.
2. You can't understand why some of us are against murdering children in order to use parts of their corpses for medical experimentation, but not against genetic manipulation of animals? I refuse to believe you are actually that stupid, this must be a troll question.
Again, that wrapping around the axle thing. Maybe it's you, maybe it's me, but this was posed as a discussion, for the purposes of discussion and NOT to try to change or challenge anybody's beliefs, to go past the method/means of collecting the material and into the difference of manipulating one but not the other.
Humor the everloving heck out of me, OK? Pretend that two sets of protoplamsmic goop that is documented to have come to us from outside this galaxy came into our possession. Pretend that the first set of this goop could be used to change the way animals look and grow and do or do not produce by-products, and that the second set of this goop could be used to change the way humans look and grow and do or do not produce by-products. And that regarding humans we are talking about curing or even preventing genitically caused diseases or reducing/eliminating cancers or even preventing them from forming in the first place. Why is playing with the first set of goop OK while playing with the second set of goop is beyond bad?
Strangely, I learned how to do that separation while studying debate, logic, and philosophy at the feet of the Jesuits, the Loyolaists, and several different flavors of rabbis. All of those folks make the anti-abortionists here look like pikers. But in spite of that they could and would take either side of the discussion for the sake of seeing which side would hold water without resorting to "$deity says it is bad".
In closing - does anybody here know how I feel about abortion? Does anybody here see how the answer to that question should not stand in the way of the discussion I have proposed?
stay safe.
