Of Lifes Little Hypocrisies and Their Major Ethical Implications
Kavita Chhibber - November 30, 2005
A thought provoking piece by a good friend Mandakini Sud
Growing up in a progressive South Asian household, I was constantly weighed down by my parents’ expectations. I was expected to excel in academia, sports and extra-curricular activities. I was expected to conduct myself with utmost dignity in public. I was expected to choose honor over privilege and right over wrong. I was expected to serve the needy and be the voice for those who were not heard. I was expected to earn a living and put all I’ve learned to good use. I was expected to be stoic in the face of adversity. I was expected to pick up the pieces upon every failure and start afresh. Despite the million expectations and counting, I was NEVER expected to be a boy.
I have rarely met people who aren’t horrified at the thought of aborting an advanced fetus or murdering a newborn baby just because it is the wrong gender. Even as someone who supports a woman's right to choose, I am appalled by the notion of terminating a fetus based on gender. Thus springs my abhorrence for this first-world society that has opened boutique Barbie and Ken producing shops in every neighborhood.
Gender selection is a bad idea that’s turning children into commodities. The cheapest culprit, whichever way you look at it, is a technology called MicroSort. MicroSort is the prêt-a-porter version of preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD), a sperm-sorting technology developed at the Genetics and IVF Institute (GIVF) in Fairfax, VA. While the clinical trial has proven effective in separating the sperm, questions remain; such as, what are the risks of exposing sperm to DNA dye and UV light? Does MicroSort cause damage to the sperm or birth defects to the child? What about the harmful effects that might surface when the child is older? While websites like www.choosethesexofyourbaby.com and fertility clinics offer money-back guarantees, I wonder how much money parents could make if their child is damaged? Do these clinics offer a warranty or have a goods return policy? In early 2005, MicroSort reported that 3.4 percent of its babies have been born with major malformations, like Down syndrome. But until the trial is officially completed, and after-effects studied over the next decade, there can be no definitive conclusions.
For most academicians and authorities on fertility, MicroSort is a bad word. Amongst them is Dr. Mark Hughes, a leading PGD authority at Wayne State University School of Medicine in Detroit. "The last time I checked, your gender wasn't a disease," he says. "There is no illness, no suffering and no reason for a physician to be involved. Besides, we're too busy helping desperate couples with serious disease build healthy families." At Columbia University, Dr. Mark Sauer balks at the idea of family balance. "What are you balancing? It discredits the value of an individual life." For those few patients who ask for it, "I look them straight in the face and say, 'We're not going to do that'." And at Northwestern, Dr. Ralph Kazer says bluntly: " 'Gattaca' was a wonderful movie. That's not what I want to do for a living." Requesting a girl could mean she will be more desired by her parents, but it's also possible she'll grow up and decide she'd rather have been a boy. "Children are going to hold their parents responsible for having made them this way," says bioethicist Kass, "and that may not be as innocent as it sounds." … Newsweek
So after ethnic cleansing, racism, slavery and genocide, what will amuse us next? We’ve already disrupted the balance on climate, environment, animals and plants. Is gender next? After pedigreed poodles, will we now award blue ribbons to the most charming integration in a petri dish? Is ‘family-balancing’ the new fashion statement? I believe that a balanced family is not the one that has heterosexual parents and an offspring of each gender. A balanced family is where the individuals feed from each other’s strengths and compensate for each other’s insecurities or failings.
Research indicates that in some parts of China there are 120 boys to only 100 girls because of gender selection - natural births produce a ratio of 105 to 100. Another study of women migrating to Beijing found they were arriving with 159 boys to only 100 girls. Another report in October 2000 found that 75% of newly wed couples in Japan want their first child to be a girl. Japan has seriously tipped the gender balance, says yet another 2005 report. The current joke in India is that with shortage of women to marry, men may have to start paying dowry instead of receiving it.
So why stop at gender selection? Why not start selecting future babies on the basis of predetermined intelligence, athletic ability, musical talent, physical attributes or personality? Where does the selfishness of egocentric pseudo-intellectual parents end? Or, does it ever? Do we want a society where children are conceived only if they are of the "right" sex? And by customizing what we want in our babies, are we sprouting an intolerant society?
With these questions, and more, I went on one afternoon to debate over bad coffee with my friend and nemesis – a rather amusing character who disagrees with me on practically everything. He waxed eloquent over freedom of choice, Roe vs. Wade, biotechnology, and the rationale for choosing the prize swimmer from the million plus sperm sample – basically taking Darwin to a whole new level. We batted heads, opinions, arguments, and achieved nothing. But one point he made was very relevant. He brought in the term ‘individual choice’. And there, I agree. I am all for individual choice. But my point is that gender selection is not an individual choice. Abortion, suicide and euthanasia are all individual choices. They impact the person who is making the choice. Suicide-bombing, on the other hand, is not an individual choice. A factory emitting Chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) and depleting the ozone is again not an individual choice. It impacts society, including those who don’t want to participate and may be harmed by the choice. When my genetically unaltered child applies for admission to Stanford University at the same time someone’s laboratorial experiment, it affects me and my child. How is that an individual choice? It isn’t. You cannot take away one person’s fundamental right to claim another’s.
I gave my parents plenty of ulcers with my radical views and unconventional life choices. When I labored over chemical formulae, I knew I had inherited my mother’s inability to cope with the subject. I am a disaster at Math despite having a mathematician for a father. I have some of the best traits of my parents and some of their worst. In a nutshell, that is what makes me unique. I am an unadulterated, un-fooled-around-with, destined outcome of my parents' love for each other. A notion far more romantic than scientific, but it is the single most important factor that binds me to them. As my parents put it, it is more important to learn to love your children for all they cannot be than for things you expect out of them. As for me, all I can do is ensure the father of my child is someone who is man enough to love our offspring irrespective of gender, personality and intellectual capability. And I can pass on what my parents taught me, not because they expect this of me. But because it is the very least I expect of myself.
Digg this entry 
Add to Del.icio.us 
Share on Facebook 
Subscribe
Posted by Kavita Chhibber at November 30, 2005 08:08 PM
Comments
Thanks Desh. I some times yearn for the days when I was a kid in a far less complex world, running bare foot on the lush green grass of my grandmother's home in Jammu, untouched by anything but real living. Today you look at men and women and wonder what is real and what is fake-there is so much that has been "fixed'.
I yearn for crooked teeth and real smiles, warm laughter lines on a gracefully aging face instead of Botox grins..nothing seems real any more!
I was thinking today, dear Kavita - about the child I thought I would have, and did not. The one I lost. IT hit me, as a long memory pang come back. I guess, when I am most afraid of losing my daughter, I know there is the one who has gone ahead to greet her. This comforts me.
My grandmother was so sweet and grand a person. I miss her alot this time of year. I was thinking how as a young girl, among 6 siblings, come rushing through her warm home, she in her apron, hair in a bun, and hugs to melt into. I was a tiny, little pixie. And she would so often say, 'where is little sister Kate'
oh my, here a few tears escape from my eyes.
I hope you can know, that I cherish your sharing!
With love,
~~ Kate
I am with you Kavita!
I have a theory:
While the Eastern sciences tried to "look" for "God" by first understanding Nature itself and reach It through the Nature.... Western/Modern science started with the premise that "God" was antithetical to science. So if we could replicate/reason/experimentally prove an event - "God's" hand was obviated.
In that sense Modern world set to "recreate" and replicate nature... for it had to be "done" to prove there was no "intelligence" behind it. We had "usurped" the "plan to create"!
Any wonder that we have ended up polluting this world so much?
Cheers,
Desh
Drishtikone.com
Dear Kavita..The Article was Great!! Lovely points. I've always felt as was pointed out there, playing way too much with Mother Nature. It has touched to the Extent of Playing God!
Being such a Nature lover and avid admirer of What the Mother Nature has given us, I find it Sickening to have it stretched this far. Values..human Emotions have very little place in today's society. JUST COMPETITION! Not the healthy one....Just Cut throat! Cut other's throat and move forward. Well..from the Darwin's point of view may sound valid and logical, but from a humane and a spiritual view..it doesn't to me and for many I'm sure but also equally sure LOL! for many it is just fine, not just fine but great advancement. Yep Great Advancement! That was nice Kavita...Men tomorrow may have to pay the dowry to get the woman, if this goes on.
When are you going to Israel again?
Love..Sachin
Kavita,
Great article. We need to understand the limitations of science. I am not believer of banning any kind of ethical research. But I do believe companies and people who offer such services should be open to unlimited liability if things go wrong. That's the only way to discourage such experimentation with human life.
I would love to see Krish comment on this article. Science has some answers about the nature, but when it comes to life, its answers are wholly inadequate. We just don't know how it operates. Whatever we know is not enough to show us how or why we get headaches, leave aside why we develop heart disease and the rest. I am all for genetic research, but I don't believe we are anywhere close to understanding what it all means. Therefore to talk about miracle cures for diseases, genetic selection for whatever desirable characteristic is premature by a century or more. Limitation of scientists (sometimes) is that they don't understand their own limitations.
Regards,
Ravi Kulkarni
dear kavita..
nice article..i feel people all over the world are trying to run behind perfection..natural imperfections are frowned upon and people are thought to be more normal..we hate diversity and we have become more competitive..may be everyone shud develop tolerance and accept us as normal abnormal people..
Thanks every one. I think in pretty much every thing any kind of excess is unhealthy. On one hand there is such a hoo ha about stem cell research, and on the other microsort slides by. The lines between what is ethical and unethical are getting blurred so fast, that I shake my head in disbelief at some of the things I see around me. Power corrupts..but to think humans can play demi god by tampering with nature is to be delusional.
Like Ravi, I am all for research, but today it is so easy to twist what is supposedly good for society and make a microsort out of it..this article is a reminder of the holocaust and what happened when Hitler tried to create the perfect race.
Does it mean that people like me who believe in nature taking its course in a healthy, humanistic way are going to be the ones who will be shunned through future generations?
And where does the buck stop..haunting, tough questions.
Sachin, no plans of going to Israel immediately, but never say never.
Kate, a sweet and touching story.I was very close to both my grand mothers but my maternal garndmother was my soul mate. I miss her to this day..
Thanks Preethi..the problem is again we are now confused between what is normal and what is not, and we have only ourselves to blame!
"Research indicates that in some parts of China there are 120 boys to only 100 girls because of gender selection - natural births produce a ratio of 105 to 100. "
Kavita,
this one sentence got me thinking.
why does even nature discriminate? i mean natural births also show that the male child is more in number when compared to the female.
as i doctor i dont recall anything about chromosomes or such determining that the male child should be born more often than a female.
even so, this a glaring example that even nature discriminates. it is bad that humans add on to that discrimination and the ratio of the girl child lessens, which is very tragic. and any effort to harm the girl child must be fought with the stiffest resistance.
but my complaint right now is not against erring humans.
it is against erring nature.
why does it do it? why cant it give a ratio of 100 males to 110 females natural births?
more confusing is the fact that nature is a Feminine force. Shakti. It gets more confusing.
does anyone know why such imbalance exists in the first place?
"While the Eastern sciences tried to "look" for "God" by first understanding Nature itself and reach It through the Nature"
I really don't understand why people need the term "science" to justify their theories. How about getting it through without trying to ride on science. There is nothing like eastern science and western science. There is only one science and it doesn't include the eastern ideas. Confused people and their desperation to get justification for their ideas from science.
Dear Aachi,
Actually nature does create more females than males. Look at any society that does not discriminate against females; they naturally have more female births. I think you got your numbers wrong.
Regards,
Ravi
Krish, you are one of the coolest guys on this blog and I always enjoy reading your comments. I need you to promise that atleast on my blogs you are not going to let things get to you. I saw some of the other exchanges, and its just not you..and Desh, I feel the same about you..Its unfortunate that people cant read each other's body language and things get out of hand, but I know you will both extend me this courtesy. You are both intelligent, warm and well read..you come up with some wonderful thoughts and I enjoy going through your posts. I just dont want that energy to dissipate into a discussion that doesnt do justice to your remarkable intelligence, great suggestions and ideas.
Btw Krish, I do want you to tell me what you think, because I enjoy reading your take on things.
Aachi, one thing that I was told repeatedly and it is substantiated by evidence, is that the male child is much more prone to genetic diseases as well as infant mortality.A lot of physicians request mothers to wait for 10 months in case they want to have their tubes tied or for the father to go for sterilization because of the high rate of infant mortality in males in the first 6 months..The last 10 cases of SIDS I heard about all involved male babies, so maybe its nature's way of keeping the balance and not the other way round.
Krish:
This is the last time I am going to respond to your comments on this topic.
To fully understand my comments I urge you to read Tao of Physics (Fritjof Capra), Ken Wilber and "The Complete Works of Vivekananda" (Advaita Ashram Press). Then we will discuss what science is and what science is what.
Until then, write some comment of your own and not just use single phrases and sentences in my comments to get any notice to your words.
Cool?
Cheers,
Desh
Drishtikone.com
Kavita:
I agree. Yesterday was a bad day. I think the emotions did get better of me with TS getting into the fray.
This was the last time I have responded to Krish or to TS. Not that I hate them - both are brilliant in the way they come out with stuff sometimes and I admire both. But its no use skinning the same calf everyday.
Cheers and regards,
Desh
Drishtikone.com
Dear All:
Thank you for the wonderful comments, insights, and opinions. When I wrote this piece, I wrote it with the intention of venting out -- getting this outrage at Microsort out of my system. I failed.
I am an atheist, pro-science, pro-choice and belive that each individual has the right to decide what is best for her/him. Having said that, I also believe that the only relationship that is above the general give-and-take rule, is the one a parent has with his child.
My grudge with people who opt for microsort is that it brings a conditionality to the relationship under which a child is loved or cherished. What kind of a parent thinks of a child and says "I will only love you if you are of the right gender"? Ask a mother who has a child in a wheelchair if she loves him. Ask a father if he ever stops caring for his errant child. We have all witnessed extreme cases of what all parents must go through to raise a child, and to raise it well.
If we start treating kids as commodities, the demands will keep growing. To the protagonists of gender selection, having a child is not like buying an SUV -- it does not come with customised features. It might have some accessories that you had not asked for and NO, you cannot exchange it for another or return it anytime before it reaches age 4.
If, after all this, you still want a child of a specific gender -- ADOPT. Give a child who has no chance in life, one. To me, it is by far the only win-win situation.
Or, if we cannot love someone who is our own flesh and blood (if it is of the wrong gender), what are the chances we can love someone whose own parents either did not want him/her or could not take care of him/her?
We talk of making a difference... it's all talk unless the difference is connected to our lives.
Mandakini
Thanks Desh, I appreciate your response and I know Krish will too. We are all are free to believe whatever we want to believe, and even if they dont jell with ours, every one has the right to their opinions. However you can always agree to disagree with respect. TS is another cool person whose poems, thoughts , and humor is fun to read, but yesterday I wrote to Mallika that every one is unravelling on an open thread, which looks seamless..punning on words..now I can become a cyber seamstress!
Mandakini well said..one problem with adoption even from India, these days is the very stringent rules now for NRIs as my close friends discovered. Interestingly most of my friends have adopted girl children, because they feel girls are discriminated against even today in India and adoptees prefer male children. Guess education doesnt always bring wisdom and compassion with it.
Desh, Please don't quote popular books written by new age spiritual gurus. It is not physics. The whole problem is due to spiritual gurus trying to interpret physics with their half baked knowledge. I have also read Tao of Physics. It is nonsense. If you are quoting any science book, there is a point in discussion. Quoting popular books and half baked interpretations doesn't mean anything.
Sorry Kavita,
I sometimes get fed up with people when they quote half baked popular books and call it science. I will avoid it.
Thank you Krish. Don't take this personally.We are all here to learn from each other. Physics used to be one of my favorite subjects in school, until a wonderful teacher introduced me to history, and I was hooked..if it wasnt for brother who saw the writer in me I would ended up majoring in history..Jerusalem was breath taking for me for that very reason.
I think my dad will enjoy meeting you..he is a physics buff and a carl sagan junkie
Mandakini,
Well said and thanks for the educational post on Microsort technology.
However, every technology has to survive in a free market system. It has to prove its worth and value to be viable . I think we ought to give ourselves the benefit of the doubt. We ought to trust that the the critical mass of people who are educated and wealthy , who can afford a procedure like Microsort will make an intelligent choice. There may be exceptions, but its utopian to expect that everyone will tow the same line.
Also, its possible that like many fads, this will come and go, because people can make intelligent choices .
Krish:
I like your confidence. Capra is a PhD in Theoretical Physics and considered a strong voice in that field. You may not agree with his juxtaposition of mysticism with Physics.. but there is not a single scientific fact or theorem that he has stated incorrectly.
Its cute that you call him New Age - another label - but that doesnt help any.
Ok, here is my suggestion to you - From now on .. in this blog - I will write on what I think I believe in... and you write what YOU think you believe in. However, the condition is - that NONE of us will quote each other.
In other words - we can write on our passions in a neutral way.. can we?
Or does one's creative point necessarily have to be juxtaposed contrarily to someone else's?
Cheers,
Desh
Drishtikone.com
Thanks Desh..you are awesome..I appreciate the tone of your post, and thoughtfulness.
Santosh amen to what you've said in the last line..may better sense prevail unless they find a "brain sort" to "fix" our brains:) and toe the lines drawn by them!
Santosh said, " every technology has to survive in a free market system."
That's what feels sad to me. That we take something as sacred as having a child and exploit it to make money. I certainly don't have anything against making a living, but there has to come a time when we, as a whole, look much harder at the deeper ramifications of how we are earning money.
I'm with you Kavita, I "yearn for crooked teeth and real smiles." Having my own children and knowing how painful it is for all of us to pretend to be something we are not only makes me yearn for that more. I want them to have the best of worlds.
Thanks for expressing your thoughts Mandakini.
And, Kavita, I want to thank you for your very personal interaction with so many of the bloggers here. I have a sense that it is very healing in some way, although I can't quite put my finger on it. Still, just wanted you to know I appreciate the spirit of equality and understanding that you bring to the boards.
Love, Kristin
"punning on words..now I can become a cyber seamstress!"
When the seemingly stressed .. stressed the seam.. the seamstress seamed the stressed! Pun intended. ;-)
Cheers,
Desh
Drishtikone.com
Dear Ravi,
i disagree.
if u think of nature then it is common knowledge that the birth of male animal species is more when compared to the females. However there are some species where the females are more in number than the males.
in humans, but, there is a generalised higher sex ratio due to more male births.. the discrepancy is becoz of an effect called the seasonal rhythm of sex ratio. The V shaped probablity of delivery of the male off spring. simply speaking, when reproduction takes place during the beginning or the end of the fertile period males are born and if reproduction takes place during the peak of fertility male and female births are equal. These modulations are explained by the introduction of the ovopathy concept and inherent preferential fertilization of non-optimally matured oocytes by Y-bearing sperm (male).
But still the natural birth ratio of males is not grossly high when compared to the females. Why?
There are many possibilites, one of the most prominent being more male fetuses might be spontaneously aborted ( as they are more delicate and have arisen out of union with a premature or aged oocyte)
the same applies to seasonal variations of reproduction.
in lay man's terms:
Nature produces high grades of males (most due to imperfect fertilizations) and leads to increased natural abortions. females are invariably produced during the peak of fertility and are more stronger than the male fetus.
nature brings forth more males, aborts more males naturally and creates females as close to perfection as possible and protects them.
nature is biased towards males in numbers and towards females in perfection.
http://humrep.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/full/18/11/2491
http://education.yahoo.com/reference/factbook/countrycompare/sr/1a.html
and during the early nineteenth century sex ratio in India was about 1000 to 976. this too when sex selective abortion was not prevalent or known. female infanticide was present. sex selective abortion was unknown due to the absence of preterm diagnostic tools.
yeah Desh,
the seams remain stressed and stretched, it seems the seamstress sewed up some but the sum is still seamingly stretched..let it rip and R.I.P or should she stretch seamlessly across cyber strings and string all the loose threads into a beautiful patchwork that works!
you put a smile on my face now have to run for a meeting: to avoid a run in my run, need to drop the cyber thimble and be nimble!
kavita,
thanks for posting this topic. i found out many things about preferential sex specifications of the fetus by nature which i previously didnt know.
ironically the concept is called male disadvantage! males have been at the receiving end for ages from nature. and females have been preferred by nature.:)
in retrospect the whole thing is ...what shall i say....peculiar.
Thanks Aachi for your informative post in return- Mandakini wrote becaue she was venting..I'm glad I got her to send me the piece and it has made so many of us think, and you have gone and looked at the stats and given us some valuable information..a good friend of mine is inspired to review gattaca, for the next edition of my online mag (the movie Mandakini mentioned)-he had forgotten it was one of his favorite films.
Kristin thank you, and tell scott I am still waiting for that piece on his dad..
have to run now..thank you all
KAVITA FOR PRESIDENT!
it is like electing yourself into the office
Aachi,
Whatever is happening is happening or done by nature. East, west, eastern science, western science, people for or people against anything all come under its umbrella. Whatever happens happens with the resultant of the efforts of all people. Seeming opposites are in fact like our opposite feet which in their apparent competition to move ahead of the other in fact help us as a whole to move ahead. Similarly, some people in nature seem to do one thing the others oppose it but with the result that nature's scheme of things moves ahead.
If we feel that nature is erring somewhere it is not that really nature is erring it is because we do not fully understand the ways of nature.
At the end of the day, nature's scheme of things is composed of and played between matter and energy - represented by Parbati or Shakti and Shiva in Hindu religious texts.
Now the game is, that energy is out to convert matter into energy and the matter is out to convert energy into matter.
Going in cycles there come the times when energy is to take the upper hand and vice versa.
When the energy is to take the upper hand, obviously Shivas or males would come to increase while Parbatis or females would come to decrease.
Similarly, when the matter is to take the upper hand, matter or females would come to increase while males would come to decrease.
The above is never to mean that females are mere matter or males are mere energy. Eventually all nanture is one, matter and enrgy are also one. So it just means that in females matter is in the foreground while energy is in the background while it is just the opposite in the case of males.
Recall Yin Yang figure. Its white part represents female or matter part while its black part represents male or energy part.
Now, when the white or female part is to give way to black or male part obviously, white will begin to decrease and black will begin to increase. Then at due time the opposite will happen.
So this is all nature's scheme and we all in one way or the other are only subserving this schmeme.
Rest assured it is perfect, it is for ever, it will always have males and females in it as per the need of the hour, it will always force people to do its bidding for furthering its ends. Just sit silent and enjoy it - this perfection incarnate!
Harb.
HARB,
TO ENJOY SOMETHING ONE HAS TO JUDGE, IN SILENCE WE CAN NOT JUDGE, SO CAN WE BE SILENT AND ENJOY.
ENLIGHTEN ME PLS
Hi ARJUNAN,
In judging we enjoy separate things. In silence we enjoy the whole eternal game of only seemingly separate things.
Thank you.
well I read all the debate about microsort. What do you all have to say about cloned babies like "SNUppy" made from Seol National University - An Afghan Hound pup cloned from ear cell of a dog?
I think cloning is perfectly legal, ethical and moral but the long term effets are not known. Doubts are that the clone is of same biological age - So cloning a 60 yrs old will give a child that is bilogically 60 yrs old with osteporosis, cataract and coronary disease!
Good Luck
Vishal Bhatia
Your eyes were my world,
Your smile my existence.
Your milk my survival,
Your blood my creation.
Mother.. today I too was to be one..
But my womb denied the birth of another!
Desh
Drishtikone.com
Post a comment
Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)
(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)
(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)
Recent Posts
- 06/08/08: Open Thread
- 05/08/08: Can the Mystery of Consciousness Be Solved Objectively?
- 05/08/08: Returning to the Mat
- 04/08/08: Outlook - Perspective - Meinung - Pensiero!
- 04/08/08: Is the Universe (including life) a Purposeless Accident? Science of Purpose: Part 1
- 04/08/08: Given that, at base, we are One being, should we always bear in mind that even the most conflicting of views will have common root connections?
- 03/08/08: Stampede in India
- 03/08/08: Are We an Accident?
- 03/08/08: Weekly Intent - Kevin Boon
- 01/08/08: New Life in a New World
Recent Comments
-
desh commented on Of Lifes Little Hypocrisies and Their Major Ethical Implications
Your eyes were my world,
Your smile my ex -
Vishal Bhatia commented on Of Lifes Little Hypocrisies and Their Major Ethical Implications
well I read all the debate about microsort. Wha
-
Harb commented on Of Lifes Little Hypocrisies and Their Major Ethical Implications
Hi ARJUNAN,
In judging we enjoy separat
-
ARJUNAN commented on Of Lifes Little Hypocrisies and Their Major Ethical Implications
HARB,
TO ENJOY SOMETHING ONE HAS TO JUD
-
Harb commented on Of Lifes Little Hypocrisies and Their Major Ethical Implications
Aachi,
Whatever is happening is happeni
Kavita:
Nice piece from your friend!
I feel there are two ways to look at the world:
- How it should be ... and ... How it is?
Either you live with what is... or you change it to what it should be.
In this case, with the promise of designer babies - will the lure for the rich be easy to let go?
Dont know.
Cheers,
Desh
Drishtikone.com