Conceived with a purpose

[Lark]

I've been thinking after watching the movie Hanna, in which the main character has a bit of a crisis after discovering that they have been conceived as part of a genetic engineering programme to create super soldiers, would it really be a cause for crisis to discover something such as that?

It made me think about the "savour siblings" debate from a while back in the UK, when parents had so called "designer babies" in order to help children who had already been conceived who had genetic defects which could be corrected by donation of genetic material from their siblings. Part of that debate revolved around how in later life children would take the news surrounding their conception. Would it be terrible or wonderful to be in their position?

Personally I think its fine or even a good thing to consider your birth as a result of thinking, judging and planning rather than chance or simply as a consequence of love or maternal and paternal drives.

Although I'm fine with some varieties of "hot housing" parenting too.

 

[Totenkindly]

I'm not sure how I'd feel, since feelings tend to rise within the heat of the situation.

Intellectually, I could process it just fine; I also have a conscious approach now that who I am is not defined by others but by myself, so it doesn't even matter what my origin is or what others intended, it just matters how I view me.... but there can still be some unbidden emotional baggage that would linger. It's hard to feel like you weren't loved or that you were just a product rather than a person; such thoughts still tend to infiltrate people's judgments of themselves even if they consciously try to brush them aside.

Are you distinguishing between pure manipulation of oneself as raw material vs a kind of planning/foresight/thinking that designates actual caring? I think the two would be perceived a bit differently.

Watching a movie like Artificial Intelligence, for example, it's clear that the scientist loves David and invested a great deal of care in him and David can respond positively to that, and the audience is positively tilted towards the scientist because of his obvious investment; then again, it's not enough for David, and what he really needs to feel is that his mother loves him as a boy. Other movies where people are purely products and treated as such even after grown, the characters have very strong negative reactions. (For examine, in Never Let Me Go, the characters find out they were fabricated by a science program as expendable resources, not as people, and it's very difficult for them to work through especially because they are still treated as property.) While these are just movies, I'm trying to use examples where the characters are perceived as complex and lifelike and thus likely to reflect attitudes of people actually in these situations.

 

[Coriolis]

Personally I think its fine or even a good thing to consider your birth as a result of thinking, judging and planning rather than chance or simply as a consequence of love or maternal and paternal drives.

What about children born of rape? Wouldn't it be harder to know you were the result of a senseless act of violence rather than a deliberate attempt to help others? Many people find it noble to devote one's life to the service of others. Is their only objection to that purpose for birth that it happens without the consent of the offspring? No one consents to being born. However we start off -- as a product, an accident, a tool for healing, an expression of love -- that is just the start. None of these origins preclude our being deeply loved once we are born. Our value is in our life, and our identity is what we make of it.

 

[Mr. TickTock]

I would not have a problem if i was meant to be a super solider. That would be awesome.


Being used as a tool for another sibling to get some spare parts? It won't sink me into depression or anything. But it would rather annoy me and probably create some problem between my and my family for a short time. But in the long run I doubt it would effect anything. I could get over such a thing.

Personally I think its fine or even a good thing to consider your birth as a result of thinking, judging and planning rather than chance or simply as a consequence of love or maternal and paternal drives.

Although I'm fine with some varieties of "hot housing" parenting too.

I also disagree with this. I don't want to exist to be created as a tool for the life of another. I am a child of an accident. My parents never hid that from me. But the thing is they are not forced into keeping me. I could of been put up for adoption. I could of been given to another family member. I could of been aborted. As someone who exist for a reason such as to let another sibling live you could easily feel as if your family does not want you. Just forced into keeping you for the sake of another. Not actually loved.

 

[Beorn]

Personally I think its fine or even a good thing to consider your birth as a result of thinking, judging and planning rather than chance or simply as a consequence of love or maternal and paternal drives.

Although I'm fine with some varieties of "hot housing" parenting too.

I'm confused.

You fearcely argue against homosexuality whenever the word is mentioned regardless of whether or not the acceptability of the homosexual lifestyle is actually at issue.

You defend the RCC tooth and nail.

But, here you take a position that seems to fly directly in the face of RCC sexual ethics. My understanding is that the RCC views sex as serving a dual purpose of procreation and spousal unity. Any commodification of sex denigrates sex to something beneath it's higher purposes.

Designing babies is necessarily commodification of sex.

Can you explain to me either how I have misunderstood the RCC's teachings or where you differ with the RCC?

Edit: for clarity

 

[So It Goes]

This is a complex and difficult question, because the reasons or lack of reasons for why and how somebody was born could differ greatly, and the environment where the child developed could certainly affect his or her reaction(s) or further behaviors to the knowledge of his or her birth.

Some example reasons for how and why a child was born: (1.) Your mom and I had sex in the back of a Dodge when we were in high-school, and we didn't want you, so we gave you up for adoption. (2.) We planned for a beautiful baby, read baby books, ate healthy, and love you, dear. (3.) You were a big mistake, but we've grown to love you. (4.) Your father left after he heard you were born but I stuck with you. I love you. (5.) You see, dear... your uncle touched me... and... well.. (6.) I can't have a baby, so your mommy went to a sperm bank. Now, you have two mommies who love you. (7.) You're a good for nothing, lazy bum. I wish your father never had you with that other woman. (8.) My dear. You come from a long line of royalty and should act proper to acquire your rightful place.

And so on.

There can be a lot of variety in the reasons for somebody being born. Sometimes, there is no plan or motive in mind. And some people never meet their biological parents. I suspect that depending on the type of parent, parents, foster parents, adoption center, and so on, that raises the child, there are certain influences that the child grows up with, but even then, the child's personality could grow despite these influences. Personally, I don't care too much if I had a purpose or not; if I was a mistake or not. I only care about what value I have for myself in the present moment.

 

[Xyk]

I was surprised to agree with Lark when opening the thread. I don't think it should matter at all how a person was conceived. I could have been a product of rape or test tubes without my knowledge as I speak. I don't think it changes who I am at all. I don't think method of conception should change anything and I don't think that knowledge WOULD change anything.

 

[Coriolis]

It matters far less how we came to be conceived and born, than what happens to us after we come into the world.

 

[Mole]

Both Frankenstein and Galatea were conceived with a purpose.

And yet they teach us that nemesis follows hubris as night follows day.