The history of man is a long path to immortality. From the first thought of hygiene to the modern thought of genetic engineering, people have made it a life's work to stay alive longer and healthier. People always attempting to invent new ways to defy time. Modern technology has opened up a gateway from which a large controversy has emerged from. There are many different ways to look at genetic engineering. The cons of the issue are privacy, ethics, safety, morality, and from the religious aspect of a co-creator issue. These are very strong arguments, but one can not look past the benefits presented by this new science.
Every member of the human race has a genetic code that specifies the details of each individual traits. By knowing and filing these codes, human confidentiality is simply becoming nonexistent. A person has a right to his or her own privacy.
An employer should not be able to deny an applicant because of his or hers heredity using DNA coding. An insurer should not be able to increase the price for insurance on an applicant because he or she has a hereditary desease. These types of circumstances could be avoided by restricting DNA coding.
Looking at the co-creatorship issue from an agnostic point of view, genetic engineering is not an alteration of God's work. In fact it could very well be the next step for evolution. Over time human beings have all ways tried to alter life. If genetic engineering is an alteration of God's work, what would we call organ donning? Would that not be considered an alteration? We as human beings are physically changing the outcome of a person's life by replacing organs everyday, but it has become an accepted act. Genetic engineering should be an accepted act.