Ethics via the New York Times
Feb 17 2009, 03:08 EST [updated Feb 17 2009, 03:09 EST]
A column in the New York Times asks Why Not Bring a Neanderthal to Life? (by cloning).
I'm afraid I can't see the [ethical] problem. If we discovered a small band of Neanderthals hidden somewhere, we'd do everything to keep them alive, just as we try to keep alive so many other endangered populations of humans and animalsThe "ick" reflex is a powerful thing, and rightly so. The author may consider me an ethics busy body and curmudgeon but I consider the author a simple barbarian. There is a big difference between say, making the mentally handicapped as comfortable as possible and cloning them for study. I assume the author wouldn't advocate deliberately birthing retards and then putting them on an isolated island, but that it what he is suggesting; so someone could write a "good" PhD thesis out of it.
Some things shouldn't be done. I originally wanted to make the author's ridiculous suggestion into a humorous post pivoting on the Dead Milkmen's "Taking Retards to the Zoo" but the more I thought the more I was outraged. For instance the author thinks that actual humans should be left in harsh and brutal conditions because that would be neat, thesis wise. You can say a lot of shitty things about Missionaries but they care much more about life than the author.