A recent television survey said 75% of parents said they should have the right to choose the sex of their children.

Personally, I was sickened by that - as it can and will "unbalance the planet" and take away from the natural birth of children.

Many same sex couples also use IVF programs, spending over $20,000 to have (one) child, despite many worldwide starving in 3rd world countries. That is appalling, with these people knowing they can't biologically have children.

Both of the above are already occurring overseas by Australian people.

Also if later scientifically found, that being attracted to another person of the same sex, was genetic, would some parents move towards abortion or genetic change, ending the life of some re same sex attraction?

Could these elements see the birth of a child, turn into an unhealthy business?

NathanJ no wonder you have so many diseases, if you are sickened by people wanting to chose the sex of a baby, & appalled that a couple of poofters might want to have a baby, & actually pay for the procedure.

Apart from being a dictatorial bugger, demanding people live their lives to suit your strange ideas, have you ever considered this world might be just too tough for you.

Perhaps you should grease your backside & try to slip off into the next, which might suit your ideas of rightness, more than this one.

NathanJ , what is IVF for,other than for helping couples who can't biologically have children, or who have genetic problems precluding them from having their own children?

I am not aware of gay people being any less likely to be able to biologically have their own children than heterosexual people? Do you have stats to show there is a lot of gay people going through the IVF procedures?

In my experience, gay women tend to have their own babies if they are able to, using donated sperm from male friends. Gay men also tend to try to use their own sperm to have their own children, using a surrogate, or a willing female friend.

I have to admit, I am not a fan of sex selection, but am aware it goes on. We have had the technology to do this for years now, but there hasn't been any huge rise in either gender numbers in our society, so I don't think it is a real problem.

//Personally, I was sickened by that - as it can and will "unbalance the planet"//

Actually, that's not very likely. Sex ratios are self-correcting and will return to the 1:1 equilibrium if disturbed thanks to Fisher's principle:

(from Wikipedia)
//W.D. Hamilton gave the following basic explanation in his 1967 paper on "Extraordinary sex ratios",[3] given the condition that males and females cost equal amounts to produce:

1. Suppose male births are less common than female.
2. A newborn male then has better mating prospects than a newborn female, and therefore can expect to have more offspring.
3. Therefore parents genetically disposed to produce males tend to have more than average numbers of grandchildren born to them.
4. Therefore the genes for male-producing tendencies spread, and male births become more common.
5. As the 1:1 sex ratio is approached, the advantage associated with producing males dies away.
6. The same reasoning holds if females are substituted for males throughout. Therefore 1:1 is the equilibrium ratio.

//Also if later scientifically found, that being attracted to another person of the same sex, was genetic, would some parents move towards abortion or genetic change, ending the life of some re same sex attraction?//

Also very unlikely: the only sort of parents likely to be so distressed by their kids being gay are the religious right, and they're about as keen on abortion as they are on homosexuality.

If 75% of people have nothing better to worry about than the sex of their children, I suppose it's their business, and nothing to do with playing God.

However, those people are pretty vacuous, to say the least; they are akin to people who's cultures value boys (stronger and better able to support them in their old age because there's no wefare in their primitive systems) over girls.

Just imagine the horrible little snots these totally selfish, self-centred characters raise!

The other thing to remember is that 75% is close enough to the 80% of the 80/20 Pareto Principle - 80% of people are of no use to anyone, including themselves, and 20% are useful. Seems to describe modern populations pretty well.

I suggest people visit the following website:

http://www.seattleivf.com/gender-selection.html?gclid=CMKh_7qS18cCFUpvvAodC6gE2A

This will show, sex selection IS turning into a business.

Philosopher Rob Sparrow, argues that many parents want to have the child that would be best for themselves, so the parents are only looking at things through that context, in a paper titled "A child's right to a decent future." Visit:

http://profiles.arts.monash.edu.au/rob-sparrow/download/AChildsRighttoaDecentFutureFinalForWeb.pdf

In terms of my reference to same sex relationships, people who are in this situation, simply know they naturally cannot have children (except adoption), which many don't want (in my view). This would deny the ability the option to raise a child upon their own values.

So spending $20,000 overseas to have a child, is an ethical issue (for these people), in the context, that having a child (including sex selection) is now like buying a "product" off a supermarket shelf), including all people who cannot produce a child. I even saw (on television) one person (who had same sex attraction) but not in a relationship, have a child through something like an IVF program, which they paid for, so that also has issues to consider.

Children's rights are of course put second, but the rights of the adult are of course (usually always) put first, as if "we" (as adults) know better. We only have to look at what adults have done over many generations to know that is not correct.

Also SBS questions online, if sex selection is occurring in Australia via abortion by people of various cultural backgrounds). Read the link for more details: http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2015/08/17/could-gender-selective-abortions-be-happening-australia. People may also wish to watch an episode of Insight where this whole issue was discussed re sex selection and genetics of children: http://www.sbs.com.au/ondemand/video/11862083517/insight-designing-babies

"People" are the only real god we have ever had, and can probably do a much better job than nature or any of the pretend gods we have had fr most of our history. A technology that can eliminate congenital disease, idiocy, predisposition to drug addiction? Bring it on!

Posted by NathanJ, Wednesday, 2 September 2015 12:10:03 PM

" ... Children's rights are of course put second, but the rights of the adult are of course (usually always) put first, ... "

I don't know that it is true to say that NJ.

Have you for example ever had a look at what is involved with adopting a child?

I have, at a time when my wife and I were considering this in relation to my step daughter. And I can tell you that it is the singularly most repugnant and invasive inquiry that I have seen spout forth from any guvment department, even worse than immigration residency applications.

So, to say that the consideration of the child's interest is not pre-eminent is false, in my opinion.

Thereafter, re the title of your thread, you must consider that many people do not believe in a God or Gods? Would you like to re-phrase?

..

Of course, in some societies, natural selection, wars etc etc have already led to imbalances in the numbers. In some countries, polygamy is used as a solution. Thus, this technology can also be used to restore the balance, and there are other circumstances where I believe that it would not be inappropriate.