One Of The Appeals Of Markets, As

It's Possible To Make Sense Of What's Morally At Stake In An Appreciation Of The Gift Of Life, Or The Gift Of A Child, Without Necessarily Presupposing That There Is A Giver. What Matters Is That The Gift - In This Case, The Child - Not Be Wholly Our Own Doing, Our Own Product.

The Norm Of Unconditional Parental Love, I Think, Depends On The Fact That We Don't Pick And Choose The Traits Of Our Children In The Way That We Pick And Choose The Features Of A Car We Might Order, Or A Consumer Good.

I Do Not Argue That Nature Is Sacrosanct In The Sense That We Must Never Tamper With Nature. That Would Disempower, Really, All Of Medicine. That Would Mean That We Can't Combat Dread Diseases - Malaria, Polio, All Of Which Are Given By Nature, If One Thinks About It.

The Other Effect That I Worry About Is The Effect On The Parent, That The Moral Teaching Of Humility And Of The Limits To Our Control That Parenthood Teaches- - That That Will Be Lost And That We Will Begin To Think Of Children More As Consumer Goods Than As Gifts That We Can't Fully Control And For Which We Aren't Fully Responsible.

The Majority Of American States Had Laws By The 1930s That Allowed For Forced Sterilization Of Socially Undesirable Categories Of People, So-called Feeble-minded, For Example, And With Hitler Culminating In Genocide.