Currently, the issue of genetically designed babies has been made easy by technological advancements. Until recently, the genetic modification or manipulation of babies, for example, customizing a baby’s sex, how babies should appear (hair color and eye color) and the avoidance of particular genetic deformities (e.g. handicaps or diseases) was a hit miss situation. Presently, fertility doctors are giving couples with access to the most recent genetically manipulated test skills, the chance to determine their babies’ sexes or any such desired modification with greater precision. In the coming few years, it could be likely that babies could be screened before conception for a wider variety of attributes. These attributes are like, “how tall they’re likely to be, what body type they will have, their hair and eye color, what sorts of illnesses they will be naturally resistant to, and even, conceivably, their IQ and personality type” (Lemonick, Jerklie & Park, 2). If the genetically designed analysis is true to its promise, couples could sooner or later be able to surpass the weeding-out of unwanted characteristics in their babies and probably begin to actually, insert desired genetic traits in their children. They might even be able to do this on genes engineered from a laboratory. Before long, these couples may be visiting fertility doctors to pick from a prepared list of preferences the same way individuals buying vehicles could order specifically customized cars. However, this technology does not go without criticism, for example, a biotech critic (Jeremy Rifkin) shocked by the technology, asserts that “it’s an ultimate shopping experience designing your baby. In a society used to cosmetic surgery and psychopharmacology, this is not a big step”. (Lemonick, Jerklie & Park, 2) This paper will therefore focus on this issue by displaying my views on the subject, and then show my preferences on a designer baby. The colloquial term “designer baby” refers to a baby whose genetic makeup has been artificially selected by genetic engineering combined with in vitro fertilization to ensure the presence or absence of particular genes or characteristics. The term is derived by comparison with “designer clothing”. It implies the ultimate commoditization of children and is therefore usually used pejoratively to signal opposition to such use of repro-genetics (McGee, 12). Currently, the world is being driven by technology; this technology, therefore, has numerous benefits to families. The outlook of this issue, similar to a lot of other moral challenges created by the genetic revolution, has confronted the globe so fast to the extent where physicians, ethicists, Christians, and politicians have started to come to grips with the repercussion, and are trying to decide which way to go. In my point of view, I don’t see anything wrong with the issue at hand; since such technology helps any family that has decided to go this way build a healthy future. This technology is beneficial because numerous numbers of diseases can be mitigated before conception. Besides this, as a parent, I can get the child of my dreams. This is a kind of baby with all the characteristics I desire in a child (i.e. the sex