OK, here is a topic which divides:

White House hits pause on editing human germline cells

The United States will hold off, for now, on clinical experiments that could alter the human germ line. John Holdren, director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy issued a statement on May 26 supporting a moratorium on the clinical use of DNA-editing methods that could cause inherited changes in human genes.

New methods that could permanently fix genetic mutations have raised the specter that people may abuse the technology to create designer babies or even alter human evolution.

“The Administration believes that altering the human germline for clinical purposes is a line that should not be crossed at this time,” Holdren writes. The full implications of creating genetically altered humans “could not be known until a number of generations had inherited the genetic changes made — and choices made in one country could affect all of us.”

[…]

So, what is wrong with being a bit more concious directive in the future of the human population? Does the blurb writer not understand that we’ve been directing our own evolution both conciously and not, through how we select mates, and how we organize our societies?

For the record - I have nothing against designer humans, as long as the techniques can be shown to cause not greater incidence of “birth defects” than currently.