Someone flipped me this Christianity Today article:
It sounds pretty basic. A lovely young couple wants children, and they want those children to prosper and grow. They want to do as much as they reasonably can to ensure that those children have good, full lives. Happy lives. Lives that are as free from suffering and pain as possible. The problem is that they run the risk of bearing children with a gene that will probably cause a slow and painful death, albeit a death many decades in the future.
What should they do? Never have children? Adopt? Take the risk and conceive, come what may? Take the risk, conceive, and then terminate the pregnancy if the gene is present? Or try preimplantation genetic diagnosis, which involves creating embryos and testing them for the problematic gene and only implanting embryos free of the gene?
The writer then proceeds to ask some tough questions – questions we should be reflecting upon as members of the pro-life community:
Is near-certain physical suffering a good reason to cut short a human life? Can there be value in suffering?
What are the larger social effects of these technologies? …
What are the larger spiritual implications of these technologies? In a world of instant gratification, diversion, and entertainment, what place is there for waiting, for longing, for the brokenness and potential openness to grace that can come with dreams deferred?
by 
Sheesh. We all will probably have a slow death and maybe a painful one. This is not news and generations and generations have had lives worth living. Do ya think that maybe those generations had a different worldview with a different focus that lead to a rewarding life beyond circumstance? What is emphasized today is we all ‘should’ always have fully exciting, entertainment filled, pleasurable moments. No wonder there is so much mental illness, despair and ‘unbearable’ situations.
Sometimes it seems that, the more we know, the more we have he opportunity to worry. And the more choices we have, the more we worry about making the wrong choice. Reproductive technology is one of many areas where the technology is advancing faster than our ability to discuss the ethical ramifications of it. And because the technology is advancing so fast, and its use becoming so widespread, we become even LESS likely to discuss the ethical ramifications, because most of us will know someone who has conceived their children through these methods, and no one wants to disparage, or even question, the choices of people who are close to us.
I wonder what’s going to happen when one of these labs makes a mistake, as is bound to happen, and a child is born, having been screened as being clear for a defective gene, who actually has the gene. Are we going to end up with more wrongful birth lawsuits?
First World problems, eh? Half the world’s population lives on less than three dollars a day, and we have the means at our disposal to run expensive test after expensive medical test on our children, picking out the ones we deem most worthy of life, and disposing of the rest.