Genetic manipulation in animals, does faster mean less moral?

[drjsp]

I already know there’s no specific Catholic guidance on this, it’s a topic for discussion. I’m a practicing veterinarian, amateur Catholic theologian interested in animal welfare and have done some homework on this already. Oh, and this is not about xenographic matters…strictly about animals.

Here are a couple of givens:

First, that selective breeding is genetic manipulation. Second, that direct genetic manipulation is…well…genetic manipulation.

So what’s the difference, morally speaking? One technique is faster than another. Does that make one technique any more or less moral than another?

 

[TK421]

Everything is morally permissible unless there is an explicit reason for why it wouldn’t be. Permissibility is assumed from the beginning and then there needs to be a reason provided for why something is evil.

 

[ProdglArchitect]

So what’s the difference, morally speaking? One technique is faster than another. Does that make one technique any more or less moral than another?

Nope. The speed at which something occurs has no impact on its morality. As long as they’re not splicing in human DNA or other crazy chimeric nonsense like that, there’s probably no issue. Genetic modification can actually do wonders to solve issues. Creating strains of food-crops that can grow in harsher climates can help reduce hunger in those areas, bigger-growing plans and animals means more food quicker, we can modify plants to continuously produce useful raw materials.

As with most kinds of knowledge, it can be, and has been, abused, but the knowledge and ability itself is morally neutral.