I read your article and i have to Agree and Disagree on some points. First i would like to suggest a median between singers to choices of either not engaging Germinal choice tech or providing it to every one. Why couldn’t you engage it but put restrictions on some of the traits that could be altered. For instance let the science prevent diseases and disorders , but not other traits like height of body type.

Singer’s argument about the effects of wanting tall children is indeed “weak and even silly,” and Dvorsky could have just stated so without misquoting Singer. I’ve pointed out the differences in caps:

SINGER: Since above-average height correlates with above-average income, and there is clearly a genetic component to height, IT IS NOT FANCIFUL TO IMAGINE couples choosing to have taller children. The outcome COULD be a genetic “arms race” that leads to taller and taller children

DVORSKY: Singer cites the observation that taller individuals tend to have higher salaries. Parents, THEREFORE, WILL LIKELY want to have tall children (this exact example is debatable, but let’s give Singer the benefit of the doubt). The consequence, claims Singer, is that such a trend WOULD have a detrimental environmental impact due to the increased costs in the “additional consumption required to fuel larger human beings.”

Next entry: The war against gender selection: don't believe the hype

Previous entry: Thinking Out Loud About Democratic World Federalism