The Ethics of Star Trek: Autonomy and Society

Thanks again to Faust! I will be quoting him throughout this speech, and I will put comments that he made in italics.PRO's CASE"The Eugenics Wars, and its fallout reinforced the idea that tampering with the genome beyond removing birth defects was a fast way to generating the worst in humanity out of a test tube. Starfleet, by and large when formed upheld that tradition as well, in keeping that augmented genetics were not allowed in Starfleet...Only very specific genetic procedures are permissible in the Federation for fear of regression back to what caused those chaotic and turbulent times slightly before the Mariposa first left...Their survival as a colony had to be continued through taboo means, even at the time of their crash."The Eugenics Wars resulted in a ban on genetic engineering, not cloning [1]. The former involves changing the human genome, whereas the latter involves mere replication of it. In fact, there is no canonical information I can find that suggests that cloning was prohibited in the Federation or its allies, and there is even evidence to suggest that cloning was permitted to some extent. For instance, on Bajor, clones had full rights as human beings, implying that the process of cloning wasn't unheard of. [2] On Voyager, students cloned potatoes. While this wasn't human cloning, it shows that the Federation did not at least consider all cloning to be illegal. [2] At the very least, there is no available evidence showing that the Federation viewed cloning as an illicit offense, and there is some slight evidence to affirm the idea that cloning was permissible (and that the rights of clones mattered.)It is important to note that the Mariposan colonists did not genetically engineer anyone; they'd cloned themselves. Therefore, what they did was not "taboo" as Pro suggests. "In keeping with the known history from the Mariposan point of view, they left Earth at a time when literally the Khan Singhs and other Augments were in the final stages of being hunted down and killed."Actually, just for factual accuracy, the original Mariposan colonists lefts Earth in the 22nd Century, while the Eugenics wars occurred around 2026. [1, 3] So, anywhere between 74-174 years could've separated the first colonists from those wars, so there is no evidence to support Pro's claim that the two events occurred rapidly after one another. 100+ years is a lot of time by human and cultural standards."The Mariposan clones, I wonder, if they themselves engaged in genetic manipulation beyond cloning. The temptation would obviously have to be there, as it would better serve the colony...The episode mentioned didn't ask the question...perhaps a race of Augments was the plan, even though it dismally failed in the past...Taking anything from someone one against their knowledge, obviously wrong."Here my opponent delves into the realm of pure and unsubstantiated speculation. Speculation is no foundation for an argument, esp. when there is no available canonical evidence to suggest that they engaged in genetic engineering. Rather, the mere fact that the Mariposans needed outside DNA (i.e. that of Riker and Pulaski) intimates that they were NOT engaged in advanced genetic projects. If they had been able to correct for the fading or if they had been able to engineer the genome somehow, why would they need that DNA? "The Mariposans are not above breaking a certain degree of decorum, either, as indicated by the kidnapping and harvesting of Riker and Pulaski for prime cloning cells."Breaking decorum in defense of your society seems like a perfectly reasonable reaction. By violating the rights of just two people they could save their entire culture. We should not condemn the Mariposans as lacking in "decorum" or manners just because they acted in that way under understandably dire circumstances. When put in situations of pressure like that, very few of us would not be willing to commit some small rights violations to reap such large rewards.BROAD REVIEWPro offers no ethical framework with which to weigh the arguments or the round. So, all of his impacts regarding the wrongness of unjustness of actions fall flat, because he gives us no ethical system with which to assess whether those actions really were wrong or unjust. Pro just assumes (bare assertion fallacy) that said actions were wrong. At the very least, we need to weigh his impacts under some kind of framework, and as I am the only one to even give any analysis of broader ethical systems (e.g utilitarianism), you need to default to my framework to weigh his impacts. I will show next round how I outweigh.He also tries to situate the Mariposan situation in the context of prior historical events, but the connect is just invented. There could be as much as 174 years separating the two events, and the Mariposans are not engaged (and Pro never proved they were engaged) in the kinds of activities that the Eugenics Wars entailed. Moreover, Pro doesn't even really give much explanation as to the importance of this supposed historical link. But even if you buy that there is some relevance there, the link is so tenuous as to not really matter.So, with that, I negate.SOURCES1 - http://en.memory-alpha.org...2 - http://en.memory-alpha.org...3 - http://en.memory-alpha.org...