Do Brown and Coakley differ on genetic engineering children?

Let’s assume that the Libertarian Kennedy opposes a law against genetically engineering children and creating children from same-sex parents (even though it is the ultimate denial of liberty for the person being created, and would result in a huge government agency to regulate and develop, and a huge insurance entitlement to enable equal access to it for all parents).

We still have no idea if Scott Brown and Martha Coakley believe that genetic engineering and same-sex procreation should be allowed, or if Congress should pass a law prohibiting creating people by any means other than joining the egg of a human female and the sperm of a human male.

Scott Brown’s opposition to same-sex marriage in Massachusetts might be an indication, just as Coakley’s support might be an indication, but neither of them has ever been asked about the right to attempt to procreate using genetically modified artificial gametes, and for all we know they may surprise us with positions exactly opposite from what we expect.

I want to know their positions on whether same-sex couples should be allowed to try to procreate together, and whether people should be allowed to conceive using genetically modified gametes.

I will not be able to support a candidate that might turn out to be a Transhumanist who believes we have a destiny to take control of evolution and start designing children to be perfect.  It will be too expensive, first of all, and destroy human rights and liberty and the source of equal rights.

About John Howard