(Replying to PARENT post)
(Replying to PARENT post)
https://pixabay.com/p-199674/?no_redirect
https://tonycavanagh.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/5005.jpg
Hardly a big difference. For genetic modification, the best solution is to increase range of tanning rather than changing the constant. It's already possible to get black skin [0] with eg. melanotan-2, so it's not that big of a change.
(Replying to PARENT post)
Some aspects of cultural, ethnic and religious identity are associated with and expressed by genetic factors like skin color.
For African Americans, just to give an example, the premise of "editing" children to be "whiter" might appear to enable racial genocide.
It doesn't apply only to skin color - some deaf people would consider genetically engineering away deafness an attack on "deaf culture."
(Replying to PARENT post)
(Replying to PARENT post)
Is this like reductio ad absurdum of PC signalling? Where do you spend the other 362 days of the year? In an environment that fair skin provides advantages for things like vitamin D production perhaps?
(Replying to PARENT post)
While it's not important enough for genetic engineering on it's own, I'd probably edit my children to be darker. Having spent a few days on the beach in Thailand, the genetic inferiority of my own fair skin is quite visible and painful.