In the coming era of personal genomics — when we all can decode our genes cheaply and easily — political candidates may be pressed to disclose their own DNA, like tax returns or lists of campaign contributors, as voters seek new ways to weigh a leader’s medical and mental fitness for public office.
The technology is advancing so quickly that the next generation of presidential hopefuls may be judged not just on the content of their character but also on the possibilities revealed in their genes, highlighting the tension between privacy and public life.
“DNA is not an issue in this campaign, but in the next campaign it will be bigger,” says George Annas, a leading authority on bioethics and human rights at Boston University. “It’s coming.”
And how would this be different than racism?
Skin color is simply a low-tech analysis of DNA from a time we didn’t know what those letters meant. We often wrongly and shamefully assumed that knowing this particular DNA-defined marker gave us a window int a persons soul, his intellect, the “content of his character.”
I expect this coming technologically-driven manifestation of racism is simply evidence that the evil of which racism is the fruit is endemic, a near universal result of the fall.
I find this darkly amusing, given that Obama hasn’t released his medical records, college transcripts (from Occidental, Columbia or Harvard), Harvard Law Review writings, law practice client list, Illinois State Senate records, etc. Yet we’re to believe the MSM will demand his DNA sequence?
Not to mention his college dissertation. And his birth certificate’s authenticity is in doubt. 🙂
But, hey, at least we know all about Joe the plumber!
Our DNA comes from our parents but our soul is given to us by God at our conception.
Hmmmm?
Which is more important our souls or our bodys’ inherited characteristics?
[blockquote]And his birth certificate’s authenticity is in doubt.[/blockquote]
No, I just saw that the state of Hawaii has confirmed its authenticity.
#2 And can you believe the biggest issue in the last election according to the media was whether George Bush missed an Air Natl Guard formation? What if we knew such details about Obama’s past?
Jeffersonian,
Then I stand corrected. But that is good to know.
It really id unforgivable to be ignorant of the facts in this day and age:
And his birth certificate’s authenticity is in doubt.
http://fightthesmears.com/articles/5/birthcertificate
Illinois State Senate records
Senator Obama’s records are public on his website along with his voting record. Here’s a synopsis:
http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2007/07/29/us/politics/20070730_OBAMA_GRAPHIC.html
Harvard Law Review writings
Just get copies, they are everywhere. He did have one unattributed article on abortion that has since been attributed to him.
Well, actually, I was looking for a little more than an NYT distillation, Brian.
You wouldn’t have his Columbia transcript, would you? From what I’m reading, Obama won’t even discuss those years and no one there seems to remember seeing him. For now I’m taking consolation in knowing Bristol Palin’s betrothed considers himself an “effing redneck,” but I’d like to see what Barry was up to at Columbia.
Where are Obama’s Harvard Law Review writings? It’s my understanding that, as editor, he didn’t contribute articles. Apparently, there are editor notes that could be attributed to him, but that’s hardly the point you’re trying to make.
He also didn’t contribute to any law journals as a lecturer at the Univ. of Chicago Law School. Doesn’t that seem a little weird for some one, as we are repeatedly told, with a penetrating legal mind?
Brian, et al. It’s an interesting birth certificate that they give out in Hawaii; his mother’s race is Caucasian and his father’s race is … African? Since when did ‘African’ become a race? How strange.
T
From what I’m reading, Obama won’t even discuss those years and no one there seems to remember seeing him.
We all read the things that we want to hear. Here is the truth:
“Federal law limits the information that Columbia can release about Mr. Obama’s time there. A spokesman for the university, Brian Connolly, confirmed that Mr. Obama spent two years at Columbia College and graduated in 1983 with a major in political science. He did not receive honors, Mr. Connolly said, though specific information on his grades is sealed. A program from the 1983 graduation ceremony lists him as a graduate.”
http://www.nysun.com/new-york/obamas-years-at-columbia-are-a-mystery/85015/
Tikvah
You’re reading to much of racist Jerome Corsi’s lies-stick to the facts-here is an anlysis of ALL of the birth certificate issues for you conspiracy nuts:
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html
We think our colleagues at PolitiFact.com, who also dug into some of these loopy theories put it pretty well: “It is possible that Obama conspired his way to the precipice of the world’s biggest job, involving a vast network of people and government agencies over decades of lies. Anything’s possible. But step back and look at the overwhelming evidence to the contrary and your sense of what’s reasonable has to take over.”
Where are Obama’s Harvard Law Review writings? It’s my understanding that, as editor, he didn’t contribute articles. Apparently, there are editor notes that could be attributed to him, but that’s hardly the point you’re trying to make.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0808/12705.html
Ahh come on guys, we have had to put up rubbish with this for the last 21 months, elect yourselves a president, and build a bridge!
Jon R
p.s. We rally don’t care who you elect, as it really doesn’t seem to matter anyway. The fruit loops who run Wall Street are the ones who really control your economy anyway. If you want us to take you seriously, regulate your banking industry.
Bryan amply show the double standards that liberals apply. Consider the source and don’t argue.
Ok, folks, if we could please return to the subject of this thread which is the issue of disclosing a candidate’s DNA as we head toward the future.
To that point, it seems a little ridiculous to worry about DNA testing in 2012 as the science is not really there yet and, with a Democrat in the White House, we should get back at least some of our privacy rights.
[blockquote]with a Democrat in the White House, we should get back at least some of our privacy rights. [/blockquote]
Don’t hold your breath. You really think the government is going to give up power once it has it, regardless of which party has the helm?
And if a candidate has to have DNA testing to run for office, isn’t that giving up even the most basic of privacy rights?
This DNA testing is a very scarey thought. Is anybody on this thread a Genetic Counselor? What do you think about this? To me, this possibility, plus cameras mounted on streets in major cities to detect crime, plus implanting ID chips under our skin, plus the sweeping liberties allowed the government in our detention system after 9/11, all add up to spell “BIG BROTHER.” I am not amused.