And if man could create life?

Great problem he would create. I was reading a blog topic (http://1001gatos.org/uma-definicao-definitiva-de-vida/) about the Science dream of create life in laboratory. In fact, the dream is much more incredible. We want to create life from inorganic matter. That’s something, but are we able? Looks like we found in the silicium the best substitute for carbon-based organic matter, the first step to the creation of life.

Ok, that’s cool, but what are the effects of this accomplishment? I don’t want to talk about clone process here, but was the first barrier that we tried to cross. Some scientists like the idea others hate. And that brings some very interesting point to the issue. Follow this. Francis S. Collins, Director of the Genome project said in a interview to a Brazilian Magazine, that make clones would make us hate ourselves more, would make us feel more dirty. And I agree with him. The ethics questions that this situation can raise are beyond our capacity to deal with them. All the world would be shaken by this issue. The very core of our existence would be put into a serious discussion.

So what about creating life? I think you already got the picture. The ethics issues concerning creation of life are way too higher and deeper then clone problem. Imagine the superficial questions raised within. What this being would be? What the meaning of his existence? What should we be for it, Masters, gods, fathers, brothers? If they are our creation, it’s our responsibility, should we guarantee his existence? Would it be free? And the list is endless.

If the last question gets a positive answer, then this apply that our creation could turn back against us! It means, that could have the right to fight against us, hate us, blame us, do exactly what we do to God. If you don’t believe in God, is exactly that free will that should be granted to the creation. I know, we are talking about an intelligent form of life, and I know will not start with that, but for sure is the desired end. Although could be just like an animal in the start, but no matter what form of life or evolution state still would raise ethics questions beyond our existence knowledge. At least the scientific knowledge available about our existence, origin and reason for living.

Don’t look obvious that with all this ethic questions, and need of knowledge, science and religion should let their prejudice behind and start to seek the needed answers? Religion is not trying to deny science anymore, that’s from the Dark age. In another hand, science is going too far ignoring the power who made our ethics cultural, religion. We can deny it legitimacy but not it existence and power. Science came that far ignoring religion, but is going to a point where gonna have to face it. Doesn’t matter how much advanced it would be. And if religion has the answer? I am not talking about the religion system, but the religion content? Bad christians are like bad scientists. Humans are imperfect every where. Even Richard Dawkins is antipathy and arrogant as also George W. Bush. But, wait, that's is not the topic .