thelizardqueen
New member
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote><i>Originally posted by: <b>paranoia</b></i>
<b>thelizardqueen</b> You dont look like one to be underestimated, I wouldnt put it past you as to your capability to interpret what I had said. Maybe just a couple of read throughs? I notice you post alot in response to board members, I myself enjoy some of your posts very much so. <b><i>Your response was greatly appreciated if only to interject your emotion on the one phrase.</i></b></end quote></div>
I suddenly feel like I've been double-dog dared. As I'm sure some of you may, or may not know, I always accept a challenge, so here goes:
You made me think quite a bit about your statement of how your existance (or rather ours as a whole in the world) was meaningless, and that you thought us guilty of self preservation. I can't even count how many times I've asked myself whether it would have been easier to die as a child, and to not have experienced life with it's miracles and hardships, ups and downs. To know nothing more, then maybe a few memories of a younger childhood. Because lets face it, if there had been no treatment for CF, I would have been long and gone before my 2nd birthday, if that. Possibly with no memories at all. Or will it be easier to live life out, to continue day in and day out of keeping my body alive, doing all of my treatments, taking all my pills, taking all preventatives possible to extend my life, only to die. Sure, I will have memories, I will have experienced life - both hardships and good times, but in the end death who I've been running from all my life will have caught up. But to think about this, is basically asking that old question of "what is the point of living?" And that's not even a question I can answer myself, or anyone for that matter. If we find an answer to this question, then please also let me know what the meaning of life is. Is it self preservation that motivates us? Yes, I think it is. Since the beginning of time humans have had to fight their way to the top. Its the only thing we know. Like you said - society, religion, the law, etc all frown upon suicide. The urge to survive has been engrained in all of us. I don't try to understand why, I don't even need to know the answer as to why. This is just how things are.
As for genetically engineering your child to be free from defects, you are right - that would be playing god. You say yourself that if it weren't for technology today, then those who are not the fittest will fall aside. If there was no technology, then you would not be able to make your "super" child. You would not be able to decide who he/she should be in life, whether they will be the fittest and survive, or if they will fall into the category of being weak. It seems that you question technology when it doesn't benefit you, like making you live a long life full of treatments and preservation only to die. But when it comes to your benefits of creating a child free of genetic mutations you embrace technology. You can't have it both ways.
And as for the meaning of life, no one will ever be able to answer that for you if you're looking for one single answer to everyone's question. There is no one meaning of life I don't think. I think it all depends on the individual. We all have our own definitions of life, and what it is we want to get from it, and what is given to us. Is the purpose of life to procreate? I don't think so, but then again its all based on every individual. If the sole purpose of living is to have babies, then I guess a lot of people aren't getting it, because there are a lot of people out there who do not have kids, nor do they want any, and their life is meaningful to them regardless of kids.
What is the meaning of life? I have no clue. What I do know, is that I believe that things happen for a reason, that you make decisions in life and you enjoy the fruits of life. That there is some higher power that we are not to understand or question, but rather just let it be. If something isn't meant to happen, then it will not happen. If I'm not meant to have kids in the grand scheme of things, then I won't. If I'm meant to die young regardless of what treatments there are out there to save me, then that's life. Because we all know that medicine is not 100% accurate. You say that technology preserves us, but in reality, there are people dieing out there with the benefits of modern science and medicine. Again, it all has to do with your genes. I had a cousin who had CF. I also had friends who had it. We were all born with the same gene's, same condition. We all recieved the same care, the same treatments, the same technology, but yet here I am today alive and healthy for the most part, and they are long and gone. Call me surviving and my friends not - survival of the fittest. I survived even though I have a genetic condition that should have killed me years ago. Not necessarily because of technology and treatments, but because of my own genetic makeup as well. So in some small minute way your logic of only the fit survive, and those with genetic conditions would die if it weren't for technology is flawed.
Now again like I said, your whole question is just so complex for me, and for all I know, I've gone off on a tangent about absolutly nothing to do with your question, but this is just what I've taken from it.
<b>thelizardqueen</b> You dont look like one to be underestimated, I wouldnt put it past you as to your capability to interpret what I had said. Maybe just a couple of read throughs? I notice you post alot in response to board members, I myself enjoy some of your posts very much so. <b><i>Your response was greatly appreciated if only to interject your emotion on the one phrase.</i></b></end quote></div>
I suddenly feel like I've been double-dog dared. As I'm sure some of you may, or may not know, I always accept a challenge, so here goes:
You made me think quite a bit about your statement of how your existance (or rather ours as a whole in the world) was meaningless, and that you thought us guilty of self preservation. I can't even count how many times I've asked myself whether it would have been easier to die as a child, and to not have experienced life with it's miracles and hardships, ups and downs. To know nothing more, then maybe a few memories of a younger childhood. Because lets face it, if there had been no treatment for CF, I would have been long and gone before my 2nd birthday, if that. Possibly with no memories at all. Or will it be easier to live life out, to continue day in and day out of keeping my body alive, doing all of my treatments, taking all my pills, taking all preventatives possible to extend my life, only to die. Sure, I will have memories, I will have experienced life - both hardships and good times, but in the end death who I've been running from all my life will have caught up. But to think about this, is basically asking that old question of "what is the point of living?" And that's not even a question I can answer myself, or anyone for that matter. If we find an answer to this question, then please also let me know what the meaning of life is. Is it self preservation that motivates us? Yes, I think it is. Since the beginning of time humans have had to fight their way to the top. Its the only thing we know. Like you said - society, religion, the law, etc all frown upon suicide. The urge to survive has been engrained in all of us. I don't try to understand why, I don't even need to know the answer as to why. This is just how things are.
As for genetically engineering your child to be free from defects, you are right - that would be playing god. You say yourself that if it weren't for technology today, then those who are not the fittest will fall aside. If there was no technology, then you would not be able to make your "super" child. You would not be able to decide who he/she should be in life, whether they will be the fittest and survive, or if they will fall into the category of being weak. It seems that you question technology when it doesn't benefit you, like making you live a long life full of treatments and preservation only to die. But when it comes to your benefits of creating a child free of genetic mutations you embrace technology. You can't have it both ways.
And as for the meaning of life, no one will ever be able to answer that for you if you're looking for one single answer to everyone's question. There is no one meaning of life I don't think. I think it all depends on the individual. We all have our own definitions of life, and what it is we want to get from it, and what is given to us. Is the purpose of life to procreate? I don't think so, but then again its all based on every individual. If the sole purpose of living is to have babies, then I guess a lot of people aren't getting it, because there are a lot of people out there who do not have kids, nor do they want any, and their life is meaningful to them regardless of kids.
What is the meaning of life? I have no clue. What I do know, is that I believe that things happen for a reason, that you make decisions in life and you enjoy the fruits of life. That there is some higher power that we are not to understand or question, but rather just let it be. If something isn't meant to happen, then it will not happen. If I'm not meant to have kids in the grand scheme of things, then I won't. If I'm meant to die young regardless of what treatments there are out there to save me, then that's life. Because we all know that medicine is not 100% accurate. You say that technology preserves us, but in reality, there are people dieing out there with the benefits of modern science and medicine. Again, it all has to do with your genes. I had a cousin who had CF. I also had friends who had it. We were all born with the same gene's, same condition. We all recieved the same care, the same treatments, the same technology, but yet here I am today alive and healthy for the most part, and they are long and gone. Call me surviving and my friends not - survival of the fittest. I survived even though I have a genetic condition that should have killed me years ago. Not necessarily because of technology and treatments, but because of my own genetic makeup as well. So in some small minute way your logic of only the fit survive, and those with genetic conditions would die if it weren't for technology is flawed.
Now again like I said, your whole question is just so complex for me, and for all I know, I've gone off on a tangent about absolutly nothing to do with your question, but this is just what I've taken from it.