Ideology in My Controversy

Now, time to look at the controversy I have been discussing as a whole. Drawing from all the sources I have researched into about this great debate, I will now answer a series of questions that pertains to all sources and all I have analyzed.

Paul Frymoyer. "Children's Genetics Significantly Affect How They Are Parented."
September 5, 2013 via Flickr. Public Domain Dedication.

1. Who is involved in the controversy?

All of mankind is involved in this controversy. If the world allows for the genetic modification of human genomes, then mankind will literally be the subject behind this debate. The oppositions currently however as those who support the modification of human embryos to those who do not. Worldwide discussions have occurred since the announcement of the original experiment underwent the procedure.

2. Who are some of the major speakers or writers within these groups?

Major speakers include the hundreds of thousands of people so far that have spoken up about their opinions on turning humans into genetically modified organisms (GMOs). It is unclear where the line has been draw as to how many support and how many disagree with the procedures. A major group citing the benefits of the procedure is the scientists themselves who conducted the experiment, along with the Chinese government who backs and funds their research.

3. What kind of social power does each group hold?

Many scientists are against the idea of turning humans into GMOs, but some obviously are not. Take the Chinese for example, although they have placed restriction on hybridizing embryos, they still allow for the modification of human stem cells. On the other side of the spectrum, many say this is unethical and should be halted immediately. Their argument is based on the assumption that the cultivation of human life should not be altered genetically.

4. What resources are available to different positions?

There have been studies as well as surveys on the topic of genetic modifications to living species. Academic and scientific journals side with both ends on GMOs just about equally. However, looking at the altercation of human life, the statistics on whether how many support or do not support is not yet obtainable.

5. What does each group value?

The scientists who conducted the tests on the human embryonic cells support their ideals that humans should live to prosper and not to suffer. They claim they are finding better way to combat disease and disorders that birth at the molecular levels within the body. Ordinary people, religious followers and scientists alike however do not think the human being should be labeled as a test subject and therefore express their opposition.

6. What counts as evidence for the different positions?

For the Chinese scientists, prior studies and experiments on previous organisms besides humans have proven to be worthy of glorification. People have been studying living organisms and testing on them for centuries; this is why the Chinese think it is accepted for them to test on human subjects. For the opposition, the evidence is more an opinion based. They do not believe that humans should be the participants in their own tests of rigorous capacity. Altering cells in a human can mean catastrophic consequences especially since our mental capabilities and genetics vary greatly from the subjects that have been tested on previously.

7. Is there a power differential between the groups?

There doesn't appear to be a power differentiating factor between the groups. It is obvious however  that there is widespread discontent with the Chinese allowing their private and governmental science sectors to test on human embryonic cells for their experiments. Many believe that their methods are unethical and some even wonder if the legality is present.

8. Is there any acknowledged common ground between groups?

There is no acknowledged common ground between the groups. Each side has their views and for the most part intend to stick to their morals. Whether action for or against human GMOs, if any, is implemented will be the deciding factor.

9. Is there any unacknowledged common ground?

There is much unacknowledged common ground. People know that the study of cells living and dead has been occurring for centuries around the world. It is almost certain that the people of Earth will inevitably use human altercation to their embryonic cells in the future, it is just uncertain when. Opposers will still continue to express their unhappiness on the matter and the debating seesaw will forever fluctuate back and forth.

10. Do the various groups listen to each other?

For the most part, no. The Chinese people have not voiced their opinions much since the tests. The Chinese scientists argue that their studies will greatly improve life on Earth in the coming centuries whether we like it or not. They disregard anything others have said that oppose their scientific goals. Some people see some benefit modifying humans to test for disease or irregularity in the human genome while others like them find that playing with the human life is equivalent to playing with fire.