<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_03_27_0010246</id>
	<title>Could Colorblindness Cure Be Morally Wrong?</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1269694200000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>destinyland writes <i>"One in 12 men suffers from colorblindness, though <a href="http://hplusmagazine.com/articles/bio/monkey-see-or-one-man\%E2\%80\%99s-fix-another\%E2\%80\%99s-enhancement">'[t]he good news here is that these folks are simply missing a patch of DNA</a> ... which is just the kind of challenge this Millennium is made for. Enter science.' But NPR's Moira Gunn (from Biotech Nation) now asks a provocative question. Is it wrong to cure colorblindness? She reports on an experiment that used a virus to introduce corrective DNA into colorblind monkeys. ('It took 20 weeks, but eventually the monkeys started distinguishing between red and green.') Then she asks, could it be viewed differently? 'Are we trying to 'normalize' humans to a threshold of experience?'"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>destinyland writes " One in 12 men suffers from colorblindness , though ' [ t ] he good news here is that these folks are simply missing a patch of DNA ... which is just the kind of challenge this Millennium is made for .
Enter science .
' But NPR 's Moira Gunn ( from Biotech Nation ) now asks a provocative question .
Is it wrong to cure colorblindness ?
She reports on an experiment that used a virus to introduce corrective DNA into colorblind monkeys .
( 'It took 20 weeks , but eventually the monkeys started distinguishing between red and green .
' ) Then she asks , could it be viewed differently ?
'Are we trying to 'normalize ' humans to a threshold of experience ?
' "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>destinyland writes "One in 12 men suffers from colorblindness, though '[t]he good news here is that these folks are simply missing a patch of DNA ... which is just the kind of challenge this Millennium is made for.
Enter science.
' But NPR's Moira Gunn (from Biotech Nation) now asks a provocative question.
Is it wrong to cure colorblindness?
She reports on an experiment that used a virus to introduce corrective DNA into colorblind monkeys.
('It took 20 weeks, but eventually the monkeys started distinguishing between red and green.
') Then she asks, could it be viewed differently?
'Are we trying to 'normalize' humans to a threshold of experience?
'"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31637316</id>
	<title>Re:As a colorblind man</title>
	<author>martas</author>
	<datestamp>1269630720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>our genetic identity is something that defines us</p></div><p>

that's simply not true.<br>
it's late, and i'm too tired to list all the reasons why. see if you can guess a few.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>our genetic identity is something that defines us that 's simply not true .
it 's late , and i 'm too tired to list all the reasons why .
see if you can guess a few .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>our genetic identity is something that defines us

that's simply not true.
it's late, and i'm too tired to list all the reasons why.
see if you can guess a few.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635886</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635364</id>
	<title>"Cure" colourblindness?</title>
	<author>Anaerin</author>
	<datestamp>1269614340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I do hope nobody's jumping to the conclusion "Colourblind = can't see colour", 'cause that's very wrong indeed. I am colourblind, but I can still see colours. Maybe they're not the same as what you see, but I can still see them. For example, a "Green" traffic light is much less saturated than the "Red" and "Yellow" lights next to it, almost white in fact.</p><p> <a href="http://www.eyecaresource.com/conditions/color-blindness/" title="eyecaresource.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.eyecaresource.com/conditions/color-blindness/</a> [eyecaresource.com] is a good reference, as indeed is the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color\_blindness" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">Wikipedia</a> [wikipedia.org] article, which also states:</p><blockquote><div><p>There are some studies which conclude that color blind individuals are better at penetrating certain color camouflages and it has been suggested that this may be the evolutionary explanation for the surprisingly high frequency of congenital red-green colour blindness</p></div></blockquote><p>At which point, are we putting society as a whole at a disadvantage by denying this evolutionary quirk?</p><p>The other question you may get asked is "How will everything look different?". It's a tough question to answer, akin to describing the sound of music to a deaf person. For most colourblind people, barring a few speciality fields (pilot, train driver), their colourblindness is not a particular hurdle, and barring a few strange choices in the wardrobe department, many may not even notice their "disability" until it is pointed out to them. There are more than enough other clues, contextual or positional clues for example, for it not to make much of a difference. So all in all it's an aesthetic choice.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do hope nobody 's jumping to the conclusion " Colourblind = ca n't see colour " , 'cause that 's very wrong indeed .
I am colourblind , but I can still see colours .
Maybe they 're not the same as what you see , but I can still see them .
For example , a " Green " traffic light is much less saturated than the " Red " and " Yellow " lights next to it , almost white in fact .
http : //www.eyecaresource.com/conditions/color-blindness/ [ eyecaresource.com ] is a good reference , as indeed is the Wikipedia [ wikipedia.org ] article , which also states : There are some studies which conclude that color blind individuals are better at penetrating certain color camouflages and it has been suggested that this may be the evolutionary explanation for the surprisingly high frequency of congenital red-green colour blindnessAt which point , are we putting society as a whole at a disadvantage by denying this evolutionary quirk ? The other question you may get asked is " How will everything look different ? " .
It 's a tough question to answer , akin to describing the sound of music to a deaf person .
For most colourblind people , barring a few speciality fields ( pilot , train driver ) , their colourblindness is not a particular hurdle , and barring a few strange choices in the wardrobe department , many may not even notice their " disability " until it is pointed out to them .
There are more than enough other clues , contextual or positional clues for example , for it not to make much of a difference .
So all in all it 's an aesthetic choice .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I do hope nobody's jumping to the conclusion "Colourblind = can't see colour", 'cause that's very wrong indeed.
I am colourblind, but I can still see colours.
Maybe they're not the same as what you see, but I can still see them.
For example, a "Green" traffic light is much less saturated than the "Red" and "Yellow" lights next to it, almost white in fact.
http://www.eyecaresource.com/conditions/color-blindness/ [eyecaresource.com] is a good reference, as indeed is the Wikipedia [wikipedia.org] article, which also states:There are some studies which conclude that color blind individuals are better at penetrating certain color camouflages and it has been suggested that this may be the evolutionary explanation for the surprisingly high frequency of congenital red-green colour blindnessAt which point, are we putting society as a whole at a disadvantage by denying this evolutionary quirk?The other question you may get asked is "How will everything look different?".
It's a tough question to answer, akin to describing the sound of music to a deaf person.
For most colourblind people, barring a few speciality fields (pilot, train driver), their colourblindness is not a particular hurdle, and barring a few strange choices in the wardrobe department, many may not even notice their "disability" until it is pointed out to them.
There are more than enough other clues, contextual or positional clues for example, for it not to make much of a difference.
So all in all it's an aesthetic choice.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31636858</id>
	<title>Morally Wrong?</title>
	<author>jonnale</author>
	<datestamp>1269625320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I am not sure why anyone would consider this morally wrong? Is there something about the operation that I am not aware of?

How are they defining "morally wrong"?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I am not sure why anyone would consider this morally wrong ?
Is there something about the operation that I am not aware of ?
How are they defining " morally wrong " ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am not sure why anyone would consider this morally wrong?
Is there something about the operation that I am not aware of?
How are they defining "morally wrong"?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31636152</id>
	<title>No.</title>
	<author>composer777</author>
	<datestamp>1269619440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635890</id>
	<title>Other genetic Disorders</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269617520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The color-blindness to me is a small issue.</p><p>If we can legitimately fix this in Humans, who choose to participate(the key for this fix, of course), then that leads us to the ability, once we get the genetic markers identified, to "repair DNA" for other diseases like Autism. Not the Hollywood glorified Rainman type stuff, but more like the 13 year old who can't read, and incessantly turns on and off lights. Or the six year old who can't even have the simplest of conversations with his mother.</p><p>LET'S FIX these things! For those who don't want the "repair" then don't worry about it. For those of us who have been praying for a cure for the incurable, let's use this technology to save those who otherwise would never be saved.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The color-blindness to me is a small issue.If we can legitimately fix this in Humans , who choose to participate ( the key for this fix , of course ) , then that leads us to the ability , once we get the genetic markers identified , to " repair DNA " for other diseases like Autism .
Not the Hollywood glorified Rainman type stuff , but more like the 13 year old who ca n't read , and incessantly turns on and off lights .
Or the six year old who ca n't even have the simplest of conversations with his mother.LET 'S FIX these things !
For those who do n't want the " repair " then do n't worry about it .
For those of us who have been praying for a cure for the incurable , let 's use this technology to save those who otherwise would never be saved .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The color-blindness to me is a small issue.If we can legitimately fix this in Humans, who choose to participate(the key for this fix, of course), then that leads us to the ability, once we get the genetic markers identified, to "repair DNA" for other diseases like Autism.
Not the Hollywood glorified Rainman type stuff, but more like the 13 year old who can't read, and incessantly turns on and off lights.
Or the six year old who can't even have the simplest of conversations with his mother.LET'S FIX these things!
For those who don't want the "repair" then don't worry about it.
For those of us who have been praying for a cure for the incurable, let's use this technology to save those who otherwise would never be saved.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31634866</id>
	<title>WTF? Just ask the patient.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269611460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Would you like to be cured?"</p><p>Problem solved.<br>
&nbsp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Would you like to be cured ?
" Problem solved .
 </tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Would you like to be cured?
"Problem solved.
 </sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31638966</id>
	<title>Provocative?  I think not</title>
	<author>NEDHead</author>
	<datestamp>1269700080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>There are provocative questions; there are stupid question; and there are questions designed to draw attention to the asker.

Is this the largest number of comments to any<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. posting?</htmltext>
<tokenext>There are provocative questions ; there are stupid question ; and there are questions designed to draw attention to the asker .
Is this the largest number of comments to any / .
posting ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are provocative questions; there are stupid question; and there are questions designed to draw attention to the asker.
Is this the largest number of comments to any /.
posting?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31650076</id>
	<title>Its not a provokative question</title>
	<author>Snaller</author>
	<datestamp>1269769200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Moira Gunn is just an idiot.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Moira Gunn is just an idiot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Moira Gunn is just an idiot.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635066</id>
	<title>Dr Pangloss's Disciples Strike Again!</title>
	<author>TheNarrator</author>
	<datestamp>1269612600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ahh... Another Dr. Pangloss who believes we live in the best of all possible worlds... We've been dealing with this sort of idiocy for quite some time now, at least since Voltaire satirized it in 1759</p><p><a href="http://www.shmoop.com/candide/dr-pangloss.html" title="shmoop.com">http://www.shmoop.com/candide/dr-pangloss.html</a> [shmoop.com] </p><blockquote><div><p>Dr. Pangloss and his philosophy are the principal focus of Voltaire&rsquo;s satire. Dr. Pangloss, Candide&rsquo;s tutor and mentor, teaches that in this best of all possible worlds, everything happens out of absolute necessity, and that everything happens for the best. This philosophy parodies the beliefs of Gottfried Leibniz, an Enlightenment era thinker who believed that the world was perfect and that all evil in it was simply a means to greater good.</p><p>Every twist of the plot, every new natural disaster, disease, and incident of robbery or assault in Candide is intended to prove Pangloss&rsquo;s Optimism utterly absurd and out of touch with reality. Pangloss&rsquo;s personal sufferings alone are more than unusually extreme. In regard to his own misfortune, Pangloss responds that it is necessary to the greater good. The result is that the philosopher appears utterly blind to his own experiences as well as the horrors endured by his friends.</p></div></blockquote></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ahh... Another Dr. Pangloss who believes we live in the best of all possible worlds... We 've been dealing with this sort of idiocy for quite some time now , at least since Voltaire satirized it in 1759http : //www.shmoop.com/candide/dr-pangloss.html [ shmoop.com ] Dr. Pangloss and his philosophy are the principal focus of Voltaire    s satire .
Dr. Pangloss , Candide    s tutor and mentor , teaches that in this best of all possible worlds , everything happens out of absolute necessity , and that everything happens for the best .
This philosophy parodies the beliefs of Gottfried Leibniz , an Enlightenment era thinker who believed that the world was perfect and that all evil in it was simply a means to greater good.Every twist of the plot , every new natural disaster , disease , and incident of robbery or assault in Candide is intended to prove Pangloss    s Optimism utterly absurd and out of touch with reality .
Pangloss    s personal sufferings alone are more than unusually extreme .
In regard to his own misfortune , Pangloss responds that it is necessary to the greater good .
The result is that the philosopher appears utterly blind to his own experiences as well as the horrors endured by his friends .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ahh... Another Dr. Pangloss who believes we live in the best of all possible worlds... We've been dealing with this sort of idiocy for quite some time now, at least since Voltaire satirized it in 1759http://www.shmoop.com/candide/dr-pangloss.html [shmoop.com] Dr. Pangloss and his philosophy are the principal focus of Voltaire’s satire.
Dr. Pangloss, Candide’s tutor and mentor, teaches that in this best of all possible worlds, everything happens out of absolute necessity, and that everything happens for the best.
This philosophy parodies the beliefs of Gottfried Leibniz, an Enlightenment era thinker who believed that the world was perfect and that all evil in it was simply a means to greater good.Every twist of the plot, every new natural disaster, disease, and incident of robbery or assault in Candide is intended to prove Pangloss’s Optimism utterly absurd and out of touch with reality.
Pangloss’s personal sufferings alone are more than unusually extreme.
In regard to his own misfortune, Pangloss responds that it is necessary to the greater good.
The result is that the philosopher appears utterly blind to his own experiences as well as the horrors endured by his friends.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635714</id>
	<title>Re:The Qualia beast raises its head again</title>
	<author>dpbsmith</author>
	<datestamp>1269616260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There <em>have</em> been cases of people with trichromatic vision in one eye and dichromatic vision in the other. If I recall correctly, the other eye was deuteranopic and they perceived colors with that eye exactly as one would expect--yellow and blue hues only, but with varying amount of brightness and saturation.</p><p>I'm not sure that really cuts the Gordian knot, though, because it's possible that the presence of a trichromatic eye might change the way the brain encodes perception with the dichromatic eye.</p><p>By the way, what color do you perceive the part of the world that is directly behind you as being? Light? Dark? Uniform? Blurred? Or do you "simply" perceive nothing? Or the absence of nothing?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There have been cases of people with trichromatic vision in one eye and dichromatic vision in the other .
If I recall correctly , the other eye was deuteranopic and they perceived colors with that eye exactly as one would expect--yellow and blue hues only , but with varying amount of brightness and saturation.I 'm not sure that really cuts the Gordian knot , though , because it 's possible that the presence of a trichromatic eye might change the way the brain encodes perception with the dichromatic eye.By the way , what color do you perceive the part of the world that is directly behind you as being ?
Light ? Dark ?
Uniform ? Blurred ?
Or do you " simply " perceive nothing ?
Or the absence of nothing ?
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There have been cases of people with trichromatic vision in one eye and dichromatic vision in the other.
If I recall correctly, the other eye was deuteranopic and they perceived colors with that eye exactly as one would expect--yellow and blue hues only, but with varying amount of brightness and saturation.I'm not sure that really cuts the Gordian knot, though, because it's possible that the presence of a trichromatic eye might change the way the brain encodes perception with the dichromatic eye.By the way, what color do you perceive the part of the world that is directly behind you as being?
Light? Dark?
Uniform? Blurred?
Or do you "simply" perceive nothing?
Or the absence of nothing?
:)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31634968</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31636440</id>
	<title>Re:The Qualia beast raises its head again</title>
	<author>Lord Ender</author>
	<datestamp>1269621540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Um... it would be pretty easy to determine which colors are visible to people or other animals: just run through the spectrum and see if they respond.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Um... it would be pretty easy to determine which colors are visible to people or other animals : just run through the spectrum and see if they respond .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Um... it would be pretty easy to determine which colors are visible to people or other animals: just run through the spectrum and see if they respond.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31634968</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31638382</id>
	<title>Question of fixing the Right Problem</title>
	<author>Lemming Mark</author>
	<datestamp>1269692580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I can't see the article at the moment for some reason, maybe they didn't like the Slashdotting.  But as various people have said, offering the choice to be cured / altered doesn't seem wrong.  However, possibly there's a real underlying point that curing these conditions isn't wrong per se but perhaps curing them wouldn't be necessary if we could fix some of society's behaviours.  If we didn't always assume that everyone had the same perceptual experience then we wouldn't need to normalise people in order to participate.  The flip side of a cure being everyone's choice is the tendency to say "Well, you can get a cure if you want" and not bother to make things accessible to people.  Which if they have a fear or moral objections about gene therapy (say) implies pressuring people to do things they're not happy with by excluding them if they don't do the necessary actions to conform.</p><p>For the case of colour blindness it's not *that* debilitating for most people and it's probably too small and inconvenient an issue to pervasively "fix" in society any time soon simply because the condition isn't obvious to others and most people don't have it anyhow.  Not having the cure isn't a serious problem and having the cure would also provide personal benefits beyond simply conforming, seeing more colours means you're getting more interesting inputs about the world.  And various professions "discriminate" somewhat legitimately against colourblindness anyway so having the cure would at least give people options (examples include astronauts, pilots - you really want them to see the red warning light, though I'm skeptical about how much of a difference colour blindness really makes here if you still know where the lights are!).  So I don't see that there's a great risk of unduly pressuring people to conform with this treatment.</p><p>There's a wider issue, though, which could become significant with other treatments for other conditions and so it's worth thinking about even if it's not the problem here.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I ca n't see the article at the moment for some reason , maybe they did n't like the Slashdotting .
But as various people have said , offering the choice to be cured / altered does n't seem wrong .
However , possibly there 's a real underlying point that curing these conditions is n't wrong per se but perhaps curing them would n't be necessary if we could fix some of society 's behaviours .
If we did n't always assume that everyone had the same perceptual experience then we would n't need to normalise people in order to participate .
The flip side of a cure being everyone 's choice is the tendency to say " Well , you can get a cure if you want " and not bother to make things accessible to people .
Which if they have a fear or moral objections about gene therapy ( say ) implies pressuring people to do things they 're not happy with by excluding them if they do n't do the necessary actions to conform.For the case of colour blindness it 's not * that * debilitating for most people and it 's probably too small and inconvenient an issue to pervasively " fix " in society any time soon simply because the condition is n't obvious to others and most people do n't have it anyhow .
Not having the cure is n't a serious problem and having the cure would also provide personal benefits beyond simply conforming , seeing more colours means you 're getting more interesting inputs about the world .
And various professions " discriminate " somewhat legitimately against colourblindness anyway so having the cure would at least give people options ( examples include astronauts , pilots - you really want them to see the red warning light , though I 'm skeptical about how much of a difference colour blindness really makes here if you still know where the lights are ! ) .
So I do n't see that there 's a great risk of unduly pressuring people to conform with this treatment.There 's a wider issue , though , which could become significant with other treatments for other conditions and so it 's worth thinking about even if it 's not the problem here .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can't see the article at the moment for some reason, maybe they didn't like the Slashdotting.
But as various people have said, offering the choice to be cured / altered doesn't seem wrong.
However, possibly there's a real underlying point that curing these conditions isn't wrong per se but perhaps curing them wouldn't be necessary if we could fix some of society's behaviours.
If we didn't always assume that everyone had the same perceptual experience then we wouldn't need to normalise people in order to participate.
The flip side of a cure being everyone's choice is the tendency to say "Well, you can get a cure if you want" and not bother to make things accessible to people.
Which if they have a fear or moral objections about gene therapy (say) implies pressuring people to do things they're not happy with by excluding them if they don't do the necessary actions to conform.For the case of colour blindness it's not *that* debilitating for most people and it's probably too small and inconvenient an issue to pervasively "fix" in society any time soon simply because the condition isn't obvious to others and most people don't have it anyhow.
Not having the cure isn't a serious problem and having the cure would also provide personal benefits beyond simply conforming, seeing more colours means you're getting more interesting inputs about the world.
And various professions "discriminate" somewhat legitimately against colourblindness anyway so having the cure would at least give people options (examples include astronauts, pilots - you really want them to see the red warning light, though I'm skeptical about how much of a difference colour blindness really makes here if you still know where the lights are!).
So I don't see that there's a great risk of unduly pressuring people to conform with this treatment.There's a wider issue, though, which could become significant with other treatments for other conditions and so it's worth thinking about even if it's not the problem here.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31636770</id>
	<title>This question bothers me...</title>
	<author>multimediavt</author>
	<datestamp>1269624600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Are we trying to 'normalize' humans to a threshold of experience?</p></div><p>There are some poor word choices in that question.</p><p>First of all, 'normalize' is not the objective.  The human eye has taken many thousands of millennia to reach the current state of evolution.  The human eye has developed over time to see a spectrum of frequencies of radiation that enable us to distinguish poisonous food from edible food, to know when someone's pulse rate is elevated, and a lot more useful observations that help to keep us alive.  To 'correct' a genetic defect in a highly evolved sensory organ is not normalization.</p><p>Second, what 'threshold' are we talking about? The most relevant definition of threshold is, 'the magnitude or intensity that must be exceeded for a certain reaction, phenomenon, result, or condition to occur or be manifested'.  So, what magnitude or intensity is at work that would need to be exceeded to experience color vision, other than the frequency of light that is *not* being perceived by the aforementioned defective sensory organ?</p><p>Don't get me wrong.  I don't think the philosophical and ethical questions of restoring the evolved function to the sensory organs of an organism should be ignored.  I think the question as stated is poorly conceived and is rendered invalid by the practical concerns of human survival, even in the modern societal context.  There are some clear disadvantages that color blind humans have to overcome in order to function within nature AND society, even today. To me, it would seem that the person who asked the quoted question above is wrestling with the thought of "playing God", and thereby altering the path of evolution, but I don't think that's a rational argument in this case. Evolution has determined the 'normal' condition, not society. If the affected human chooses to restore the naturally evolved functionality of their defective organs, where is the moral or ethical dilemma, and/or where's the sin?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Are we trying to 'normalize ' humans to a threshold of experience ? There are some poor word choices in that question.First of all , 'normalize ' is not the objective .
The human eye has taken many thousands of millennia to reach the current state of evolution .
The human eye has developed over time to see a spectrum of frequencies of radiation that enable us to distinguish poisonous food from edible food , to know when someone 's pulse rate is elevated , and a lot more useful observations that help to keep us alive .
To 'correct ' a genetic defect in a highly evolved sensory organ is not normalization.Second , what 'threshold ' are we talking about ?
The most relevant definition of threshold is , 'the magnitude or intensity that must be exceeded for a certain reaction , phenomenon , result , or condition to occur or be manifested' .
So , what magnitude or intensity is at work that would need to be exceeded to experience color vision , other than the frequency of light that is * not * being perceived by the aforementioned defective sensory organ ? Do n't get me wrong .
I do n't think the philosophical and ethical questions of restoring the evolved function to the sensory organs of an organism should be ignored .
I think the question as stated is poorly conceived and is rendered invalid by the practical concerns of human survival , even in the modern societal context .
There are some clear disadvantages that color blind humans have to overcome in order to function within nature AND society , even today .
To me , it would seem that the person who asked the quoted question above is wrestling with the thought of " playing God " , and thereby altering the path of evolution , but I do n't think that 's a rational argument in this case .
Evolution has determined the 'normal ' condition , not society .
If the affected human chooses to restore the naturally evolved functionality of their defective organs , where is the moral or ethical dilemma , and/or where 's the sin ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Are we trying to 'normalize' humans to a threshold of experience?There are some poor word choices in that question.First of all, 'normalize' is not the objective.
The human eye has taken many thousands of millennia to reach the current state of evolution.
The human eye has developed over time to see a spectrum of frequencies of radiation that enable us to distinguish poisonous food from edible food, to know when someone's pulse rate is elevated, and a lot more useful observations that help to keep us alive.
To 'correct' a genetic defect in a highly evolved sensory organ is not normalization.Second, what 'threshold' are we talking about?
The most relevant definition of threshold is, 'the magnitude or intensity that must be exceeded for a certain reaction, phenomenon, result, or condition to occur or be manifested'.
So, what magnitude or intensity is at work that would need to be exceeded to experience color vision, other than the frequency of light that is *not* being perceived by the aforementioned defective sensory organ?Don't get me wrong.
I don't think the philosophical and ethical questions of restoring the evolved function to the sensory organs of an organism should be ignored.
I think the question as stated is poorly conceived and is rendered invalid by the practical concerns of human survival, even in the modern societal context.
There are some clear disadvantages that color blind humans have to overcome in order to function within nature AND society, even today.
To me, it would seem that the person who asked the quoted question above is wrestling with the thought of "playing God", and thereby altering the path of evolution, but I don't think that's a rational argument in this case.
Evolution has determined the 'normal' condition, not society.
If the affected human chooses to restore the naturally evolved functionality of their defective organs, where is the moral or ethical dilemma, and/or where's the sin?
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31637842</id>
	<title>Is it wrong to cure colorblindness?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269684180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>It is if you have to resort to animal testing.<br>
<br>
Sadistic asshats.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It is if you have to resort to animal testing .
Sadistic asshats .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is if you have to resort to animal testing.
Sadistic asshats.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635710</id>
	<title>Re:slashdot would look kinda strange ...</title>
	<author>GaryOlson</author>
	<datestamp>1269616260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You mean the same way it does now? Black and white and various shades of grey with the occasional blue?</htmltext>
<tokenext>You mean the same way it does now ?
Black and white and various shades of grey with the occasional blue ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You mean the same way it does now?
Black and white and various shades of grey with the occasional blue?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635106</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31637504</id>
	<title>"Deaf culture" opposition to curing deafness</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269721260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
There's a political position that "curing deafness" can be immoral.  It's even been called "cultural genocide".  See this National Association for the Deaf position statement, <a href="http://www.nad.org/issues/technology/assistive-listening/cochlear-implants" title="nad.org">Deaf Culture, Cochlear Implants, and Elective Disability:</a> [nad.org] "Many within the medical profession continue to view deafness essentially as a disability and an abnormality and believe that deaf and hard of hearing individuals need to be "fixed" by cochlear implants.  This pathological view must be challenged and corrected by greater exposure to and interaction with well-adjusted and successful deaf and hard of hearing individuals."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's a political position that " curing deafness " can be immoral .
It 's even been called " cultural genocide " .
See this National Association for the Deaf position statement , Deaf Culture , Cochlear Implants , and Elective Disability : [ nad.org ] " Many within the medical profession continue to view deafness essentially as a disability and an abnormality and believe that deaf and hard of hearing individuals need to be " fixed " by cochlear implants .
This pathological view must be challenged and corrected by greater exposure to and interaction with well-adjusted and successful deaf and hard of hearing individuals .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
There's a political position that "curing deafness" can be immoral.
It's even been called "cultural genocide".
See this National Association for the Deaf position statement, Deaf Culture, Cochlear Implants, and Elective Disability: [nad.org] "Many within the medical profession continue to view deafness essentially as a disability and an abnormality and believe that deaf and hard of hearing individuals need to be "fixed" by cochlear implants.
This pathological view must be challenged and corrected by greater exposure to and interaction with well-adjusted and successful deaf and hard of hearing individuals.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635076</id>
	<title>I've seen that movie before</title>
	<author>Bugamn</author>
	<datestamp>1269612600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Are we talking about splicing?

It went very wrong last time.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Are we talking about splicing ?
It went very wrong last time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Are we talking about splicing?
It went very wrong last time.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31639672</id>
	<title>Re:I'll do it... but...</title>
	<author>davidwr</author>
	<datestamp>1269706860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>yet a colorblind man will insist (very often) that he's correct.</p></div><p>Ah, that's because <b>he's a man</b>!  *cue rimshot*</p><p><div class="quote"><p>What color is this crayon?</p></div><p>This is because of the lack of a reference.  People's memories are fallible and as you pointed out, we remember things differently.  Also, thinks look different in different lighting.  If I "remember" seeing a brick red crayon under sunlight, and you show me an unlabeled brick red crayon in an indoor or non-outdoor-color-temperature incandescent or worse, non-white light, I'm liable to say it's something other than brick red.</p><p>On the other hand, if you had a pack of crayons handy and you asked me to find the matching crayon, I and most other people could do so very easily.  A color-blind person might have trouble if two crayons in the pack looked identical to him.  Likewise, if the room lighting was non-white and as a result two different crayons were indistinguishable to the average person, the average person would have the same difficulty.  Walk into a room lit by single-color lights sometime and try figuring out what is what color.  Even if there are only two lights lit, say, red and green, people will have difficulties telling certain colors apart.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>yet a colorblind man will insist ( very often ) that he 's correct.Ah , that 's because he 's a man !
* cue rimshot * What color is this crayon ? This is because of the lack of a reference .
People 's memories are fallible and as you pointed out , we remember things differently .
Also , thinks look different in different lighting .
If I " remember " seeing a brick red crayon under sunlight , and you show me an unlabeled brick red crayon in an indoor or non-outdoor-color-temperature incandescent or worse , non-white light , I 'm liable to say it 's something other than brick red.On the other hand , if you had a pack of crayons handy and you asked me to find the matching crayon , I and most other people could do so very easily .
A color-blind person might have trouble if two crayons in the pack looked identical to him .
Likewise , if the room lighting was non-white and as a result two different crayons were indistinguishable to the average person , the average person would have the same difficulty .
Walk into a room lit by single-color lights sometime and try figuring out what is what color .
Even if there are only two lights lit , say , red and green , people will have difficulties telling certain colors apart .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>yet a colorblind man will insist (very often) that he's correct.Ah, that's because he's a man!
*cue rimshot*What color is this crayon?This is because of the lack of a reference.
People's memories are fallible and as you pointed out, we remember things differently.
Also, thinks look different in different lighting.
If I "remember" seeing a brick red crayon under sunlight, and you show me an unlabeled brick red crayon in an indoor or non-outdoor-color-temperature incandescent or worse, non-white light, I'm liable to say it's something other than brick red.On the other hand, if you had a pack of crayons handy and you asked me to find the matching crayon, I and most other people could do so very easily.
A color-blind person might have trouble if two crayons in the pack looked identical to him.
Likewise, if the room lighting was non-white and as a result two different crayons were indistinguishable to the average person, the average person would have the same difficulty.
Walk into a room lit by single-color lights sometime and try figuring out what is what color.
Even if there are only two lights lit, say, red and green, people will have difficulties telling certain colors apart.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31636466</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31636488</id>
	<title>I suffer from colorblindness</title>
	<author>Sefi915</author>
	<datestamp>1269622140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm not grayscale colorblind.  But I have trouble, at times, depending on context, differentiating between blue-green, blue-purple, green-brown, brown-red, red-green, purple-gray, gray-green... I'm sure you get the picture.</p><p>I'd love to be able to tell when my cellphone or DS Lite needs charging just by the light of the power indicator.<br>I'd love to be able to tell my girlfriend that the red of her blouse goes great with the highlights in her hair.<br>I wish I could see those Magic Image thingies.<br>I hate picking out "the wrong shirt" on St. Patty's Day.</p><p>I can't tell resistor colors apart - I had to get help in that class in school.<br>I had to tell a Navy Sub recruiter that I am colorblind.  He stopped calling.<br>I can't play a lot of video games because of color problems.  Metroid Prime, Devil May Cry.  Had issues in certain zones in Everquest; still have issues in certain zones in World of Warcraft.</p><p>It would make my life easier.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not grayscale colorblind .
But I have trouble , at times , depending on context , differentiating between blue-green , blue-purple , green-brown , brown-red , red-green , purple-gray , gray-green... I 'm sure you get the picture.I 'd love to be able to tell when my cellphone or DS Lite needs charging just by the light of the power indicator.I 'd love to be able to tell my girlfriend that the red of her blouse goes great with the highlights in her hair.I wish I could see those Magic Image thingies.I hate picking out " the wrong shirt " on St. Patty 's Day.I ca n't tell resistor colors apart - I had to get help in that class in school.I had to tell a Navy Sub recruiter that I am colorblind .
He stopped calling.I ca n't play a lot of video games because of color problems .
Metroid Prime , Devil May Cry .
Had issues in certain zones in Everquest ; still have issues in certain zones in World of Warcraft.It would make my life easier .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not grayscale colorblind.
But I have trouble, at times, depending on context, differentiating between blue-green, blue-purple, green-brown, brown-red, red-green, purple-gray, gray-green... I'm sure you get the picture.I'd love to be able to tell when my cellphone or DS Lite needs charging just by the light of the power indicator.I'd love to be able to tell my girlfriend that the red of her blouse goes great with the highlights in her hair.I wish I could see those Magic Image thingies.I hate picking out "the wrong shirt" on St. Patty's Day.I can't tell resistor colors apart - I had to get help in that class in school.I had to tell a Navy Sub recruiter that I am colorblind.
He stopped calling.I can't play a lot of video games because of color problems.
Metroid Prime, Devil May Cry.
Had issues in certain zones in Everquest; still have issues in certain zones in World of Warcraft.It would make my life easier.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31638400</id>
	<title>Not nearly far enough</title>
	<author>smchris</author>
	<datestamp>1269692760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Where's my ability to distinguish red from infrared and violet from ultraviolet?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Where 's my ability to distinguish red from infrared and violet from ultraviolet ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Where's my ability to distinguish red from infrared and violet from ultraviolet?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31637598</id>
	<title>the real issue...</title>
	<author>hitmark</author>
	<datestamp>1269723120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>comes when this goes beyond fixing "issues", and starts improving on aspects of the human body.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>comes when this goes beyond fixing " issues " , and starts improving on aspects of the human body .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>comes when this goes beyond fixing "issues", and starts improving on aspects of the human body.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31637368</id>
	<title>Re:Oh give me a BREAK!</title>
	<author>Pentium100</author>
	<datestamp>1269632160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"I'm sorry, sir, but you must remain color blind and unable to get your pilots license/do some other work, because we cannot allow you to change your genes, because there is at least a slight possibility of you color blindness gene to have some unintentional benefits. You won't get those benefits though, but maybe humans in a few hundred years will."</p><p>That's stupid.</p><p>Also, if people hate other people because of some minor differences (skin color, religion, sexual orientation) that do not give any actual (dis)advantage, imagine how much telepaths would be hated, since they would have an advantage over mundanes.</p><p>How is telepathy supposed to work anyway?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" I 'm sorry , sir , but you must remain color blind and unable to get your pilots license/do some other work , because we can not allow you to change your genes , because there is at least a slight possibility of you color blindness gene to have some unintentional benefits .
You wo n't get those benefits though , but maybe humans in a few hundred years will .
" That 's stupid.Also , if people hate other people because of some minor differences ( skin color , religion , sexual orientation ) that do not give any actual ( dis ) advantage , imagine how much telepaths would be hated , since they would have an advantage over mundanes.How is telepathy supposed to work anyway ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"I'm sorry, sir, but you must remain color blind and unable to get your pilots license/do some other work, because we cannot allow you to change your genes, because there is at least a slight possibility of you color blindness gene to have some unintentional benefits.
You won't get those benefits though, but maybe humans in a few hundred years will.
"That's stupid.Also, if people hate other people because of some minor differences (skin color, religion, sexual orientation) that do not give any actual (dis)advantage, imagine how much telepaths would be hated, since they would have an advantage over mundanes.How is telepathy supposed to work anyway?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635838</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31634968</id>
	<title>The Qualia beast raises its head again</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269612120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qualia" title="wikipedia.org">Qualia</a> [wikipedia.org] is concerned, nothing is certain. It's reasonable to produce scientific measurements of this and that. But what colours (or saturation) they *map* to inside the brain is another matter. For example, some creatures are monochromats, which means they can probably only see one colour. But what that colour actually is, is anyone's guess.</p><p>Apparently, some people have four colour cones instead of three. Do they see a new colour competely outside our range, or just have extra 'depth' to distinguish our current range more easily?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When Qualia [ wikipedia.org ] is concerned , nothing is certain .
It 's reasonable to produce scientific measurements of this and that .
But what colours ( or saturation ) they * map * to inside the brain is another matter .
For example , some creatures are monochromats , which means they can probably only see one colour .
But what that colour actually is , is anyone 's guess.Apparently , some people have four colour cones instead of three .
Do they see a new colour competely outside our range , or just have extra 'depth ' to distinguish our current range more easily ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When Qualia [wikipedia.org] is concerned, nothing is certain.
It's reasonable to produce scientific measurements of this and that.
But what colours (or saturation) they *map* to inside the brain is another matter.
For example, some creatures are monochromats, which means they can probably only see one colour.
But what that colour actually is, is anyone's guess.Apparently, some people have four colour cones instead of three.
Do they see a new colour competely outside our range, or just have extra 'depth' to distinguish our current range more easily?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31637752</id>
	<title>Off with their nads.</title>
	<author>fyoder</author>
	<datestamp>1269682200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Making people more like the average, for example, curing colour blindness, is free, but enhancement costs you your balls.  Making enhancement always cost and never allowing it to be got for free from parents' dna doesn't eliminate, but does reduce, some of the social implications.  The rich still have an advantage, of course, but that's hardly new.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Making people more like the average , for example , curing colour blindness , is free , but enhancement costs you your balls .
Making enhancement always cost and never allowing it to be got for free from parents ' dna does n't eliminate , but does reduce , some of the social implications .
The rich still have an advantage , of course , but that 's hardly new .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Making people more like the average, for example, curing colour blindness, is free, but enhancement costs you your balls.
Making enhancement always cost and never allowing it to be got for free from parents' dna doesn't eliminate, but does reduce, some of the social implications.
The rich still have an advantage, of course, but that's hardly new.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635820</id>
	<title>Re:The Qualia beast raises its head again</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269616980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetrachromat#Possibility\_of\_human\_tetrachromats" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">Tetrachromats</a> [wikipedia.org] is what they're called. It only happens in women. It shows up as sort of a different shade of green from what I understand.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Tetrachromats [ wikipedia.org ] is what they 're called .
It only happens in women .
It shows up as sort of a different shade of green from what I understand .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Tetrachromats [wikipedia.org] is what they're called.
It only happens in women.
It shows up as sort of a different shade of green from what I understand.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31634968</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31637628</id>
	<title>Re:as an extreme red-green colorblind person...</title>
	<author>RobinEggs</author>
	<datestamp>1269680460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Huh...slavery versus advances in medical science and you manage to imply it's a toss-up. For the love of god someone mod this a troll.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Huh...slavery versus advances in medical science and you manage to imply it 's a toss-up .
For the love of god someone mod this a troll .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Huh...slavery versus advances in medical science and you manage to imply it's a toss-up.
For the love of god someone mod this a troll.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635450</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31637048</id>
	<title>Re:I think I'll pass on this.</title>
	<author>carolfromoz</author>
	<datestamp>1269627000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In the Vietnam war colour blind soldiers were in demand for spotting the vietcong from helicopters. The weren't distracted by all the jungle green.

</p><p>An old friend of my mother's had this job</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In the Vietnam war colour blind soldiers were in demand for spotting the vietcong from helicopters .
The were n't distracted by all the jungle green .
An old friend of my mother 's had this job</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In the Vietnam war colour blind soldiers were in demand for spotting the vietcong from helicopters.
The weren't distracted by all the jungle green.
An old friend of my mother's had this job</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635638</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31634940</id>
	<title>I think I'll pass on this.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269611880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I am color blind.  It doesn't really cause me any problems other than a small number of awkward social situations where I can't observe something that is obvious to a room full of people.  That and I can't see the numbers in the dot tests.</p><p>But that actually sounds really freaky, a virus that can change my perception of colors.  I've lived my whole life with color blindness and I have to wonder what it would be like to "cure" it suddenly.  Who knows?  Maybe I associate a given thing with a given color, and seeing it differently would be freaky or just not right, like waking up one morning to learn that ketchup is really green.</p><p>If you came to me and said, I can give you something that'd cure your color blindness, I think I'd be inclined to say no.  Life has been all right up to now without that "cure".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I am color blind .
It does n't really cause me any problems other than a small number of awkward social situations where I ca n't observe something that is obvious to a room full of people .
That and I ca n't see the numbers in the dot tests.But that actually sounds really freaky , a virus that can change my perception of colors .
I 've lived my whole life with color blindness and I have to wonder what it would be like to " cure " it suddenly .
Who knows ?
Maybe I associate a given thing with a given color , and seeing it differently would be freaky or just not right , like waking up one morning to learn that ketchup is really green.If you came to me and said , I can give you something that 'd cure your color blindness , I think I 'd be inclined to say no .
Life has been all right up to now without that " cure " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am color blind.
It doesn't really cause me any problems other than a small number of awkward social situations where I can't observe something that is obvious to a room full of people.
That and I can't see the numbers in the dot tests.But that actually sounds really freaky, a virus that can change my perception of colors.
I've lived my whole life with color blindness and I have to wonder what it would be like to "cure" it suddenly.
Who knows?
Maybe I associate a given thing with a given color, and seeing it differently would be freaky or just not right, like waking up one morning to learn that ketchup is really green.If you came to me and said, I can give you something that'd cure your color blindness, I think I'd be inclined to say no.
Life has been all right up to now without that "cure".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635956</id>
	<title>Crazy talk</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269618060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>No, of course it is not immoral to cure a disease. Who asked the stupid question, a Jehovah's Witness? A Christian Scientist? Such crazy talk could not have come from anyone but a religious nut who thinks God wants you to suffer, or he wouldn't have punished you for your sins with a disease. People who believe since nonsense would have kept us in caves, or caused our extinction if they had run the world from the dawn of man until now.</htmltext>
<tokenext>No , of course it is not immoral to cure a disease .
Who asked the stupid question , a Jehovah 's Witness ?
A Christian Scientist ?
Such crazy talk could not have come from anyone but a religious nut who thinks God wants you to suffer , or he would n't have punished you for your sins with a disease .
People who believe since nonsense would have kept us in caves , or caused our extinction if they had run the world from the dawn of man until now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, of course it is not immoral to cure a disease.
Who asked the stupid question, a Jehovah's Witness?
A Christian Scientist?
Such crazy talk could not have come from anyone but a religious nut who thinks God wants you to suffer, or he wouldn't have punished you for your sins with a disease.
People who believe since nonsense would have kept us in caves, or caused our extinction if they had run the world from the dawn of man until now.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31637446</id>
	<title>Re:What's wrong with normal?</title>
	<author>waynemcdougall</author>
	<datestamp>1269720120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>My parents choose to have my extreme shortsightedness corrected at birth instead of it being detexted at age 12 when I got glasses.

Instead of burying my head in books and learning logarithms and teaching myself to do maths in different bases, I could see the ball in sports.

Instead of hiding in the library I played cricket and rugby. I became a jock and captain of the rugby team.

Instead of studying computer science and going to university I tried and failed to be a sports star. Now I supervise the road construction crew in my home town.

Thanks mum and dad. Not that I'd know how my life changed thanks to my cure.</htmltext>
<tokenext>My parents choose to have my extreme shortsightedness corrected at birth instead of it being detexted at age 12 when I got glasses .
Instead of burying my head in books and learning logarithms and teaching myself to do maths in different bases , I could see the ball in sports .
Instead of hiding in the library I played cricket and rugby .
I became a jock and captain of the rugby team .
Instead of studying computer science and going to university I tried and failed to be a sports star .
Now I supervise the road construction crew in my home town .
Thanks mum and dad .
Not that I 'd know how my life changed thanks to my cure .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My parents choose to have my extreme shortsightedness corrected at birth instead of it being detexted at age 12 when I got glasses.
Instead of burying my head in books and learning logarithms and teaching myself to do maths in different bases, I could see the ball in sports.
Instead of hiding in the library I played cricket and rugby.
I became a jock and captain of the rugby team.
Instead of studying computer science and going to university I tried and failed to be a sports star.
Now I supervise the road construction crew in my home town.
Thanks mum and dad.
Not that I'd know how my life changed thanks to my cure.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31634974</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635494</id>
	<title>Re:What the... I don't even...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269615120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There is this "small head" syndrome in Pakistan area which is a hereditary condition. The cure is screening off the foetuses. For some people, this might be morally wrong. Introducing a "simple" precision virus to implement a cure for hereditary conditions without causing any long term effects like cancer would be much preferable option for a "pro-lifer", probably. The issue would be to test most unborn babies before the damage would be irreversible, depending of the condition. This kind of interference would require fully functional pre-natal healthcare and mass-customized treatment manufacturing, or even on the spot production using programmable microfluidic chips.<br>
&nbsp; I'd bet the possible moral dilemma comes from the usage of public resources for baby customization, that is, for treatment of non-life endangering conditions which don't require constant medication and incur cost for the society. Money is all we care, after all.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There is this " small head " syndrome in Pakistan area which is a hereditary condition .
The cure is screening off the foetuses .
For some people , this might be morally wrong .
Introducing a " simple " precision virus to implement a cure for hereditary conditions without causing any long term effects like cancer would be much preferable option for a " pro-lifer " , probably .
The issue would be to test most unborn babies before the damage would be irreversible , depending of the condition .
This kind of interference would require fully functional pre-natal healthcare and mass-customized treatment manufacturing , or even on the spot production using programmable microfluidic chips .
  I 'd bet the possible moral dilemma comes from the usage of public resources for baby customization , that is , for treatment of non-life endangering conditions which do n't require constant medication and incur cost for the society .
Money is all we care , after all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is this "small head" syndrome in Pakistan area which is a hereditary condition.
The cure is screening off the foetuses.
For some people, this might be morally wrong.
Introducing a "simple" precision virus to implement a cure for hereditary conditions without causing any long term effects like cancer would be much preferable option for a "pro-lifer", probably.
The issue would be to test most unborn babies before the damage would be irreversible, depending of the condition.
This kind of interference would require fully functional pre-natal healthcare and mass-customized treatment manufacturing, or even on the spot production using programmable microfluidic chips.
  I'd bet the possible moral dilemma comes from the usage of public resources for baby customization, that is, for treatment of non-life endangering conditions which don't require constant medication and incur cost for the society.
Money is all we care, after all.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31634942</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635886</id>
	<title>Re:As a colorblind man</title>
	<author>Puff\_Of\_Hot\_Air</author>
	<datestamp>1269617520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think the issue that people are missing is not "would you want to be cured from X problem", rather it is the manner of the cure. This cure modifies your DNA, and our genetic identity is something that defines us. I see paralles to the concepts raised in "the eternal sunshine of the spotless mind". This specific case of colour blindness is not particulary controversial or worrying, but playing with DNA takes us down the GATACA path (enhanced DNA, class balance between those with access vs those without etc). It raises ethical questions that need to be discussed. As a side note, my wife is colour blind (extremely rare for women), but she tells me she would not get the cure. She thinks of her colour blindness as part of her identity.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think the issue that people are missing is not " would you want to be cured from X problem " , rather it is the manner of the cure .
This cure modifies your DNA , and our genetic identity is something that defines us .
I see paralles to the concepts raised in " the eternal sunshine of the spotless mind " .
This specific case of colour blindness is not particulary controversial or worrying , but playing with DNA takes us down the GATACA path ( enhanced DNA , class balance between those with access vs those without etc ) .
It raises ethical questions that need to be discussed .
As a side note , my wife is colour blind ( extremely rare for women ) , but she tells me she would not get the cure .
She thinks of her colour blindness as part of her identity .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think the issue that people are missing is not "would you want to be cured from X problem", rather it is the manner of the cure.
This cure modifies your DNA, and our genetic identity is something that defines us.
I see paralles to the concepts raised in "the eternal sunshine of the spotless mind".
This specific case of colour blindness is not particulary controversial or worrying, but playing with DNA takes us down the GATACA path (enhanced DNA, class balance between those with access vs those without etc).
It raises ethical questions that need to be discussed.
As a side note, my wife is colour blind (extremely rare for women), but she tells me she would not get the cure.
She thinks of her colour blindness as part of her identity.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635134</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31639210</id>
	<title>similarity to cochlear implants</title>
	<author>lumbricus</author>
	<datestamp>1269703140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>This situation seems to be similar to the ongoing debates about the morality of cochlear implants (for the hearing impaired):
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cochlear\_implant#Controversy" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cochlear\_implant#Controversy</a> [wikipedia.org]</htmltext>
<tokenext>This situation seems to be similar to the ongoing debates about the morality of cochlear implants ( for the hearing impaired ) : http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cochlear \ _implant # Controversy [ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This situation seems to be similar to the ongoing debates about the morality of cochlear implants (for the hearing impaired):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cochlear\_implant#Controversy [wikipedia.org]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31639468</id>
	<title>If color-blindness is a disability...</title>
	<author>davidwr</author>
	<datestamp>1269705180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So is being much shorter or taller than average, being left-handed in a right-handed culture, having uncorrectable or corrected vision less than about 20-40, having a lot less physical stamina than average, uncorrectable noticeable hearing loss, having an IQ below about 80 or 90, having a lot less common sense than average, having the infirmities normally associated with old age, easy-to-accommodate food or medicine allergies, etc. etc. The list goes on and on.</p><p>My point is there are many disabilities that are minor in impact.  Most of us will have at least one during our lifetime well before old age, and those who don't will likely have an immediate family member who does.</p><p>Yes, society should make reasonable accommodations, such as designing tools that left-handed people can use and where practical using color schemes that don't impact the color-blind.  However, it's not a major handicap like near-total blindness, having only enough physical stamina to walk short distances without a rest, or food allergies so severe or complex it's hard to eat without hurting yourself.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So is being much shorter or taller than average , being left-handed in a right-handed culture , having uncorrectable or corrected vision less than about 20-40 , having a lot less physical stamina than average , uncorrectable noticeable hearing loss , having an IQ below about 80 or 90 , having a lot less common sense than average , having the infirmities normally associated with old age , easy-to-accommodate food or medicine allergies , etc .
etc. The list goes on and on.My point is there are many disabilities that are minor in impact .
Most of us will have at least one during our lifetime well before old age , and those who do n't will likely have an immediate family member who does.Yes , society should make reasonable accommodations , such as designing tools that left-handed people can use and where practical using color schemes that do n't impact the color-blind .
However , it 's not a major handicap like near-total blindness , having only enough physical stamina to walk short distances without a rest , or food allergies so severe or complex it 's hard to eat without hurting yourself .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So is being much shorter or taller than average, being left-handed in a right-handed culture, having uncorrectable or corrected vision less than about 20-40, having a lot less physical stamina than average, uncorrectable noticeable hearing loss, having an IQ below about 80 or 90, having a lot less common sense than average, having the infirmities normally associated with old age, easy-to-accommodate food or medicine allergies, etc.
etc. The list goes on and on.My point is there are many disabilities that are minor in impact.
Most of us will have at least one during our lifetime well before old age, and those who don't will likely have an immediate family member who does.Yes, society should make reasonable accommodations, such as designing tools that left-handed people can use and where practical using color schemes that don't impact the color-blind.
However, it's not a major handicap like near-total blindness, having only enough physical stamina to walk short distances without a rest, or food allergies so severe or complex it's hard to eat without hurting yourself.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635070</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31634974</id>
	<title>What's wrong with normal?</title>
	<author>CoffeeDog</author>
	<datestamp>1269612180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>I can see how the topic of meddling with DNA to augment/fix people can be a slippery slope, but by itself the question of "is it morally wrong to cure colorblindness" seems to be the same as "is it morally wrong to cure short/far sightedness". We already normalize things like this and it's entirely by individual choice. You can choose to wear your glasses or not and now you'll be able to get your color vision corrected or not.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I can see how the topic of meddling with DNA to augment/fix people can be a slippery slope , but by itself the question of " is it morally wrong to cure colorblindness " seems to be the same as " is it morally wrong to cure short/far sightedness " .
We already normalize things like this and it 's entirely by individual choice .
You can choose to wear your glasses or not and now you 'll be able to get your color vision corrected or not .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can see how the topic of meddling with DNA to augment/fix people can be a slippery slope, but by itself the question of "is it morally wrong to cure colorblindness" seems to be the same as "is it morally wrong to cure short/far sightedness".
We already normalize things like this and it's entirely by individual choice.
You can choose to wear your glasses or not and now you'll be able to get your color vision corrected or not.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31641198</id>
	<title>Re:Morally wrong?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269716580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>exactly</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>exactly</tokentext>
<sentencetext>exactly</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635054</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31638302</id>
	<title>Easy</title>
	<author>SmallFurryCreature</author>
	<datestamp>1269691500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So you are gay, that can be fixed.
</p><p>So you are a redhead, that can be fixed.
</p><p>So you are black, that can be fixed.
</p><p>We had people who wanted to create a super-human race. No thanks.
</p><p>I am seriously near-sighted. It is who I am.
</p><p>Now take a look at yourself, are you a blond arian god? Then someone thinks you are not perfect enough.
</p><p>If you think there is no moral problem, then you have no problem with genetic screening and having your mate chosen for you on the best match and any offspring that doesn't meet standard, terminated.
</p><p>That is the moral question. It ain't hard.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So you are gay , that can be fixed .
So you are a redhead , that can be fixed .
So you are black , that can be fixed .
We had people who wanted to create a super-human race .
No thanks .
I am seriously near-sighted .
It is who I am .
Now take a look at yourself , are you a blond arian god ?
Then someone thinks you are not perfect enough .
If you think there is no moral problem , then you have no problem with genetic screening and having your mate chosen for you on the best match and any offspring that does n't meet standard , terminated .
That is the moral question .
It ai n't hard .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So you are gay, that can be fixed.
So you are a redhead, that can be fixed.
So you are black, that can be fixed.
We had people who wanted to create a super-human race.
No thanks.
I am seriously near-sighted.
It is who I am.
Now take a look at yourself, are you a blond arian god?
Then someone thinks you are not perfect enough.
If you think there is no moral problem, then you have no problem with genetic screening and having your mate chosen for you on the best match and any offspring that doesn't meet standard, terminated.
That is the moral question.
It ain't hard.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635134</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31636158</id>
	<title>Q: Could Colorblindness Cure Be Morally Wrong?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269619440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Q:  Could Colorblindness Cure Be Morally Wrong?<br>A: No. It would only be morally wrong if they forced it on someone.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Q : Could Colorblindness Cure Be Morally Wrong ? A : No .
It would only be morally wrong if they forced it on someone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Q:  Could Colorblindness Cure Be Morally Wrong?A: No.
It would only be morally wrong if they forced it on someone.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31638696</id>
	<title>Unintended consequences?</title>
	<author>moxley</author>
	<datestamp>1269697380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Mixing viruses and genes in order to "cure" something seems like the sort of situation that is bound to end up with unintended consequences.</p><p>Viruses are masters at what they do: adapt and proliferate.</p><p>Maybe I have read too many books or watched too many movies, but I wonder what the possibilities are for this to mutate, or spread, or just go horribly wrong.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Mixing viruses and genes in order to " cure " something seems like the sort of situation that is bound to end up with unintended consequences.Viruses are masters at what they do : adapt and proliferate.Maybe I have read too many books or watched too many movies , but I wonder what the possibilities are for this to mutate , or spread , or just go horribly wrong .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mixing viruses and genes in order to "cure" something seems like the sort of situation that is bound to end up with unintended consequences.Viruses are masters at what they do: adapt and proliferate.Maybe I have read too many books or watched too many movies, but I wonder what the possibilities are for this to mutate, or spread, or just go horribly wrong.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31637078</id>
	<title>Old dilemma</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269627360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I am nearsighted, but since glasses have existed as a "cure" for near-sightedness for hundreds of years that is no longer considered a disability.<br>And behold, lenses are evil technology, small boys will use them to kill ants, should we really mass produce those and kill all the ants?<br>For most people old problems does no longer counts as problems, but we still fail to see that history just repeats itself.</p><p>Yes, there will be people who will check boxes to get the kids they want if technology is there.<br>Why? Because different people value different things in life, some drives a hummer others are vegans.<br>Don't worry, be happy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I am nearsighted , but since glasses have existed as a " cure " for near-sightedness for hundreds of years that is no longer considered a disability.And behold , lenses are evil technology , small boys will use them to kill ants , should we really mass produce those and kill all the ants ? For most people old problems does no longer counts as problems , but we still fail to see that history just repeats itself.Yes , there will be people who will check boxes to get the kids they want if technology is there.Why ?
Because different people value different things in life , some drives a hummer others are vegans.Do n't worry , be happy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am nearsighted, but since glasses have existed as a "cure" for near-sightedness for hundreds of years that is no longer considered a disability.And behold, lenses are evil technology, small boys will use them to kill ants, should we really mass produce those and kill all the ants?For most people old problems does no longer counts as problems, but we still fail to see that history just repeats itself.Yes, there will be people who will check boxes to get the kids they want if technology is there.Why?
Because different people value different things in life, some drives a hummer others are vegans.Don't worry, be happy.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31636684</id>
	<title>not a black and white issue</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269624000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I can plainly see this is not a black and white issue.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I can plainly see this is not a black and white issue .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can plainly see this is not a black and white issue.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635226</id>
	<title>Idiocy as usual</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269613380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I am unable to distinguish some shades of red and green. Do I want to be cured? Erm, cured? How about you go fuck yourself and let scientists work on useful stuff? My back is feeling pretty sore, go grow me a a pair of backbones. Get one for yourself too, figuratively speaking.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I am unable to distinguish some shades of red and green .
Do I want to be cured ?
Erm , cured ?
How about you go fuck yourself and let scientists work on useful stuff ?
My back is feeling pretty sore , go grow me a a pair of backbones .
Get one for yourself too , figuratively speaking .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am unable to distinguish some shades of red and green.
Do I want to be cured?
Erm, cured?
How about you go fuck yourself and let scientists work on useful stuff?
My back is feeling pretty sore, go grow me a a pair of backbones.
Get one for yourself too, figuratively speaking.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31636830</id>
	<title>Re:Oh give me a BREAK!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269625140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think part of it for the deaf (and other communities that tend to draw together) is that if a treatment exists, it may not be effective for all and by curing part of the community, it damages the rest of it.  If in the land of the blind, the one eyed man is king, what happens when all the one eyed men are able to gain full sight and integrate with the rest of society?  Only the fully blind remain.  Continuing the vision analogy, road signs in Boca Raton are larger than normal because elderly have poorer vision on average.  If those with moderate vision could have their vision restored, there would be less impetus to accommodate and those with severe vision problems would be even worse off.  The same applies for physically disabled - if 2/3 of paraplegics start to walk, the remaining 1/3 will find it harder to get around as fewer businesses will take their patronage into account (ADA aside).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think part of it for the deaf ( and other communities that tend to draw together ) is that if a treatment exists , it may not be effective for all and by curing part of the community , it damages the rest of it .
If in the land of the blind , the one eyed man is king , what happens when all the one eyed men are able to gain full sight and integrate with the rest of society ?
Only the fully blind remain .
Continuing the vision analogy , road signs in Boca Raton are larger than normal because elderly have poorer vision on average .
If those with moderate vision could have their vision restored , there would be less impetus to accommodate and those with severe vision problems would be even worse off .
The same applies for physically disabled - if 2/3 of paraplegics start to walk , the remaining 1/3 will find it harder to get around as fewer businesses will take their patronage into account ( ADA aside ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think part of it for the deaf (and other communities that tend to draw together) is that if a treatment exists, it may not be effective for all and by curing part of the community, it damages the rest of it.
If in the land of the blind, the one eyed man is king, what happens when all the one eyed men are able to gain full sight and integrate with the rest of society?
Only the fully blind remain.
Continuing the vision analogy, road signs in Boca Raton are larger than normal because elderly have poorer vision on average.
If those with moderate vision could have their vision restored, there would be less impetus to accommodate and those with severe vision problems would be even worse off.
The same applies for physically disabled - if 2/3 of paraplegics start to walk, the remaining 1/3 will find it harder to get around as fewer businesses will take their patronage into account (ADA aside).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635056</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635122</id>
	<title>Mediocre Mass Media Talk Tactics</title>
	<author>DynaSoar</author>
	<datestamp>1269612840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Are we trying to 'normalize' humans to a threshold of experience?"</p><p>We who? Implying that the listener is involved is a simplistic means to maintain their attention. The listener certainly has nothing to do with the project.</p><p>Are the researchers doing these things? No, they're only trying to solve an interesting problem. They're not trying to do anything to anyone. They're only trying to make this available.</p><p>Only the potential recipient has the responsibility. Nobody else matters.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Are we trying to 'normalize ' humans to a threshold of experience ?
" We who ?
Implying that the listener is involved is a simplistic means to maintain their attention .
The listener certainly has nothing to do with the project.Are the researchers doing these things ?
No , they 're only trying to solve an interesting problem .
They 're not trying to do anything to anyone .
They 're only trying to make this available.Only the potential recipient has the responsibility .
Nobody else matters .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Are we trying to 'normalize' humans to a threshold of experience?
"We who?
Implying that the listener is involved is a simplistic means to maintain their attention.
The listener certainly has nothing to do with the project.Are the researchers doing these things?
No, they're only trying to solve an interesting problem.
They're not trying to do anything to anyone.
They're only trying to make this available.Only the potential recipient has the responsibility.
Nobody else matters.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31638876</id>
	<title>Oy, I can see it now...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269699300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Patch Tuesday.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Patch Tuesday .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Patch Tuesday.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31636946</id>
	<title>Re:as an extreme red-green colorblind person...</title>
	<author>Prof.Phreak</author>
	<datestamp>1269625920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...those red/green LEDs (and some street lights). Dangerous things.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...those red/green LEDs ( and some street lights ) .
Dangerous things .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...those red/green LEDs (and some street lights).
Dangerous things.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635070</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31640460</id>
	<title>Re:I think the same thing...</title>
	<author>JesterJosh</author>
	<datestamp>1269711960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It was House. <a href="http://cochlearimplantonline.com/site/?p=1204" title="cochlearim...online.com" rel="nofollow">http://cochlearimplantonline.com/site/?p=1204</a> [cochlearim...online.com]
"On the other hand, another doctor says, &ldquo;Anything I can simulate with $3 earplugs isn&rsquo;t a culture!&rdquo; when discussing deafness as a disability vs. a culture with his colleagues.  Though I understand his point, and his reaction is one that is very common among hearing people who have little/no experience with d/Deafness, I still felt that was insulting.  Deaf Culture is not just about the inability to hear.  I do think this was telling, though, because most people who are unfamiliar with the d/Deaf debates (aka the majority of the world!) have a similar reaction &mdash; &ldquo;What!?!  Of course it&rsquo;s a disability not being able to hear!  Of course you&rsquo;d want to hear if you could!&rdquo;  That&rsquo;s just the general public&rsquo;s perception"</htmltext>
<tokenext>It was House .
http : //cochlearimplantonline.com/site/ ? p = 1204 [ cochlearim...online.com ] " On the other hand , another doctor says ,    Anything I can simulate with $ 3 earplugs isn    t a culture !    when discussing deafness as a disability vs. a culture with his colleagues .
Though I understand his point , and his reaction is one that is very common among hearing people who have little/no experience with d/Deafness , I still felt that was insulting .
Deaf Culture is not just about the inability to hear .
I do think this was telling , though , because most people who are unfamiliar with the d/Deaf debates ( aka the majority of the world !
) have a similar reaction       What ! ? !
Of course it    s a disability not being able to hear !
Of course you    d want to hear if you could !    That    s just the general public    s perception "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It was House.
http://cochlearimplantonline.com/site/?p=1204 [cochlearim...online.com]
"On the other hand, another doctor says, “Anything I can simulate with $3 earplugs isn’t a culture!” when discussing deafness as a disability vs. a culture with his colleagues.
Though I understand his point, and his reaction is one that is very common among hearing people who have little/no experience with d/Deafness, I still felt that was insulting.
Deaf Culture is not just about the inability to hear.
I do think this was telling, though, because most people who are unfamiliar with the d/Deaf debates (aka the majority of the world!
) have a similar reaction — “What!?!
Of course it’s a disability not being able to hear!
Of course you’d want to hear if you could!”  That’s just the general public’s perception"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635828</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635054</id>
	<title>Morally wrong?</title>
	<author>J'raxis</author>
	<datestamp>1269612540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How about you just let people invent the cure and then <em>let them ask the individuals who are colorblind</em> if they want to be cured or not? It's only "morally wrong" if you try to force someone to be "cured" from something they don't see as a disease.</p><p>Let's ask another question: Is it <em>morally wrong</em> to deny someone a cure because in your own infinite arrogance <em>you</em> think it's "wrong" to give it to them?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How about you just let people invent the cure and then let them ask the individuals who are colorblind if they want to be cured or not ?
It 's only " morally wrong " if you try to force someone to be " cured " from something they do n't see as a disease.Let 's ask another question : Is it morally wrong to deny someone a cure because in your own infinite arrogance you think it 's " wrong " to give it to them ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How about you just let people invent the cure and then let them ask the individuals who are colorblind if they want to be cured or not?
It's only "morally wrong" if you try to force someone to be "cured" from something they don't see as a disease.Let's ask another question: Is it morally wrong to deny someone a cure because in your own infinite arrogance you think it's "wrong" to give it to them?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31640236</id>
	<title>Idiotic</title>
	<author>b4upoo</author>
	<datestamp>1269710760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>          Could a cure for deafness be immoral? How about congenital blindness? How about epilepsy?<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Some people have too much time and money if they sit about worrying about nonsense like the morality of curing color blindness. And why in the world should society get to decide if something is moral or not. Why not let the person who is about to have a color blind child or a color blind person deal with their own issues?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Could a cure for deafness be immoral ?
How about congenital blindness ?
How about epilepsy ?
                    Some people have too much time and money if they sit about worrying about nonsense like the morality of curing color blindness .
And why in the world should society get to decide if something is moral or not .
Why not let the person who is about to have a color blind child or a color blind person deal with their own issues ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>          Could a cure for deafness be immoral?
How about congenital blindness?
How about epilepsy?
                    Some people have too much time and money if they sit about worrying about nonsense like the morality of curing color blindness.
And why in the world should society get to decide if something is moral or not.
Why not let the person who is about to have a color blind child or a color blind person deal with their own issues?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635858</id>
	<title>Sometimes the color blind can be funny.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269617400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Quite a number of years ago my brother in law had a car that was getting small rust spots all over it so he decided it needed to be fixed. He called me up to come help him as there were a lot of rust spots. I went over and it took us nearly all day to sand them down and prime them up. He said he would handle the final painting of them. It was a dark brown car. What I did not know was that he has green/brown color blindness. He called me up a couple of days later to say he had it all done. So I went over to take a look at the finished handy work. I damn near busted a gut from laughing because he now had a dark brown car with dark green spots all over it. At first he would not believe me so he called my sister out (she had not seen the car since we started the repairs) and the look on her face and the question "How come there are dark green spots all over it?" started me laughing all over again.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Quite a number of years ago my brother in law had a car that was getting small rust spots all over it so he decided it needed to be fixed .
He called me up to come help him as there were a lot of rust spots .
I went over and it took us nearly all day to sand them down and prime them up .
He said he would handle the final painting of them .
It was a dark brown car .
What I did not know was that he has green/brown color blindness .
He called me up a couple of days later to say he had it all done .
So I went over to take a look at the finished handy work .
I damn near busted a gut from laughing because he now had a dark brown car with dark green spots all over it .
At first he would not believe me so he called my sister out ( she had not seen the car since we started the repairs ) and the look on her face and the question " How come there are dark green spots all over it ?
" started me laughing all over again .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Quite a number of years ago my brother in law had a car that was getting small rust spots all over it so he decided it needed to be fixed.
He called me up to come help him as there were a lot of rust spots.
I went over and it took us nearly all day to sand them down and prime them up.
He said he would handle the final painting of them.
It was a dark brown car.
What I did not know was that he has green/brown color blindness.
He called me up a couple of days later to say he had it all done.
So I went over to take a look at the finished handy work.
I damn near busted a gut from laughing because he now had a dark brown car with dark green spots all over it.
At first he would not believe me so he called my sister out (she had not seen the car since we started the repairs) and the look on her face and the question "How come there are dark green spots all over it?
" started me laughing all over again.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31638554</id>
	<title>NO!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269695040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hmmm, some people aren't affected by a disease, and providing a vaccination for others could be ethically wrong because we are trying to normalize human experience.(/sarcasm)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hmmm , some people are n't affected by a disease , and providing a vaccination for others could be ethically wrong because we are trying to normalize human experience .
( /sarcasm )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hmmm, some people aren't affected by a disease, and providing a vaccination for others could be ethically wrong because we are trying to normalize human experience.
(/sarcasm)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31639908</id>
	<title>Are you SERIOUS?</title>
	<author>JayRott</author>
	<datestamp>1269708600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>How could it POSSIBLY be a bad thing to offer someone a chance to see what they have been missing? This is one of the dumbest concerns I think I have ever read! People are not going to be forced to undergo the procedure so the moral aspect is kind of a non-issue. As for the "where does it stop" argument, that has always been a bullshit excuse to disagree with something you might slightly disagree with. The even funnier part of that is that the examples that are listed are usually mostly unrelated to the argument at hand. So being someone who IS red-green color blind you ask if I want to see what I've been missing... HELL YEAH!</htmltext>
<tokenext>How could it POSSIBLY be a bad thing to offer someone a chance to see what they have been missing ?
This is one of the dumbest concerns I think I have ever read !
People are not going to be forced to undergo the procedure so the moral aspect is kind of a non-issue .
As for the " where does it stop " argument , that has always been a bullshit excuse to disagree with something you might slightly disagree with .
The even funnier part of that is that the examples that are listed are usually mostly unrelated to the argument at hand .
So being someone who IS red-green color blind you ask if I want to see what I 've been missing... HELL YEAH !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How could it POSSIBLY be a bad thing to offer someone a chance to see what they have been missing?
This is one of the dumbest concerns I think I have ever read!
People are not going to be forced to undergo the procedure so the moral aspect is kind of a non-issue.
As for the "where does it stop" argument, that has always been a bullshit excuse to disagree with something you might slightly disagree with.
The even funnier part of that is that the examples that are listed are usually mostly unrelated to the argument at hand.
So being someone who IS red-green color blind you ask if I want to see what I've been missing... HELL YEAH!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31639886</id>
	<title>Re:As a colorblind man</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269708540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There are definitely amputees who don't want their limbs back. Aimee Mullins did an interesting talk for TED and an article for Gizmodo on this topic. And of course there are some who do.</p><p>Electronics doesn't have to be closed to colorblind people. That's a completely contingent state of affairs. Non-colorblind people made decisions that ended up excluding colorblind people. Similar decisions were made with regard to traffic lights and so on.</p><p>The moral question is actually a question of values, and is twofold: first, why do we think it's better/easier to change someone's body rather than change the way we make (like the electronic example), even when those decisions are totally arbitrary? Second, why do we value uniformity over diversity? It seems to me that we can get into the idea of a world where everyone has full color vision, or where everyone is colorblind, but we can't handle a world where people of different color visions coexist and make allowances for each other. Diversity of course has the potential for misunderstanding and conflict, but doesn't it have benefits also?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are definitely amputees who do n't want their limbs back .
Aimee Mullins did an interesting talk for TED and an article for Gizmodo on this topic .
And of course there are some who do.Electronics does n't have to be closed to colorblind people .
That 's a completely contingent state of affairs .
Non-colorblind people made decisions that ended up excluding colorblind people .
Similar decisions were made with regard to traffic lights and so on.The moral question is actually a question of values , and is twofold : first , why do we think it 's better/easier to change someone 's body rather than change the way we make ( like the electronic example ) , even when those decisions are totally arbitrary ?
Second , why do we value uniformity over diversity ?
It seems to me that we can get into the idea of a world where everyone has full color vision , or where everyone is colorblind , but we ca n't handle a world where people of different color visions coexist and make allowances for each other .
Diversity of course has the potential for misunderstanding and conflict , but does n't it have benefits also ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are definitely amputees who don't want their limbs back.
Aimee Mullins did an interesting talk for TED and an article for Gizmodo on this topic.
And of course there are some who do.Electronics doesn't have to be closed to colorblind people.
That's a completely contingent state of affairs.
Non-colorblind people made decisions that ended up excluding colorblind people.
Similar decisions were made with regard to traffic lights and so on.The moral question is actually a question of values, and is twofold: first, why do we think it's better/easier to change someone's body rather than change the way we make (like the electronic example), even when those decisions are totally arbitrary?
Second, why do we value uniformity over diversity?
It seems to me that we can get into the idea of a world where everyone has full color vision, or where everyone is colorblind, but we can't handle a world where people of different color visions coexist and make allowances for each other.
Diversity of course has the potential for misunderstanding and conflict, but doesn't it have benefits also?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635134</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31636102</id>
	<title>I hate being colourblind</title>
	<author>nintendoeats</author>
	<datestamp>1269619080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If I am denied a cure to this frustrating debilitation because somebody thinks that it will lead to Gattica, I am going to track them down, take off one of their arms and tell them that prosthetics are unethical. And painkillers.

Seriously, It sucks. Be glad if you don't have it, join me in moderate irritation if you do.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If I am denied a cure to this frustrating debilitation because somebody thinks that it will lead to Gattica , I am going to track them down , take off one of their arms and tell them that prosthetics are unethical .
And painkillers .
Seriously , It sucks .
Be glad if you do n't have it , join me in moderate irritation if you do .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If I am denied a cure to this frustrating debilitation because somebody thinks that it will lead to Gattica, I am going to track them down, take off one of their arms and tell them that prosthetics are unethical.
And painkillers.
Seriously, It sucks.
Be glad if you don't have it, join me in moderate irritation if you do.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31637174</id>
	<title>Oh my, this sounds like politics over common sense</title>
	<author>Torodung</author>
	<datestamp>1269628560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Someone's worried about a cure for "the gay," I think (or something similar, apologies to Rachel Maddow). That would be an ethical quandary for the listeners of NPR. You might even see avowed atheists come out and say such actions are against un-God's random mutative Will, until the Holy Retrovirus of Antioch turned them all into Mormons.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;^)</p><p>Let's ditch the politics. The problem isn't the morality or ethical question of "curing" colorblindness, if that is a person's choice, any more than hair coloring is an ethics issue. It's that we would have to be <b>very</b> sure that the virus was constrained by the wishes of the curable. In other words: non-communicable. Otherwise, this sounds like the sort of health care mandate that would not be appreciated, or ethical. The preservation of that choice is paramount.</p><p>The link appears to be dead, Jim, but I'm guessing that's the gist of it.</p><p>--<br>Toro</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Someone 's worried about a cure for " the gay , " I think ( or something similar , apologies to Rachel Maddow ) .
That would be an ethical quandary for the listeners of NPR .
You might even see avowed atheists come out and say such actions are against un-God 's random mutative Will , until the Holy Retrovirus of Antioch turned them all into Mormons .
; ^ ) Let 's ditch the politics .
The problem is n't the morality or ethical question of " curing " colorblindness , if that is a person 's choice , any more than hair coloring is an ethics issue .
It 's that we would have to be very sure that the virus was constrained by the wishes of the curable .
In other words : non-communicable .
Otherwise , this sounds like the sort of health care mandate that would not be appreciated , or ethical .
The preservation of that choice is paramount.The link appears to be dead , Jim , but I 'm guessing that 's the gist of it.--Toro</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Someone's worried about a cure for "the gay," I think (or something similar, apologies to Rachel Maddow).
That would be an ethical quandary for the listeners of NPR.
You might even see avowed atheists come out and say such actions are against un-God's random mutative Will, until the Holy Retrovirus of Antioch turned them all into Mormons.
;^)Let's ditch the politics.
The problem isn't the morality or ethical question of "curing" colorblindness, if that is a person's choice, any more than hair coloring is an ethics issue.
It's that we would have to be very sure that the virus was constrained by the wishes of the curable.
In other words: non-communicable.
Otherwise, this sounds like the sort of health care mandate that would not be appreciated, or ethical.
The preservation of that choice is paramount.The link appears to be dead, Jim, but I'm guessing that's the gist of it.--Toro</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31642786</id>
	<title>cure everyone!</title>
	<author>twotailakitsune</author>
	<datestamp>1269685560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Some women can see even better then Normal. We see in Red, Blue, Green, but they have a 4th. How about curing me of not being able to see the 4th?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Some women can see even better then Normal .
We see in Red , Blue , Green , but they have a 4th .
How about curing me of not being able to see the 4th ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Some women can see even better then Normal.
We see in Red, Blue, Green, but they have a 4th.
How about curing me of not being able to see the 4th?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31638962</id>
	<title>Re:I think I'll pass on this.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269700080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Thanks for making that point. I looked up information on rods and cones. Apparently cones are responsible for high-resolution vision (near the center of your visual field) AND for color vision. The site I found says that for the cones, 64\% are red, 32\% are green, and 2\% are blue. The cones in a color blind person still work, they just aren't divided into red or green cones. You give up color perception in favor of higher visual acuity.</p><p>It would be interesting if this was something that was reversible. If someone could "try out" color vision, or color blindness for that matter, and choose to keep it or not. It's much less of a difficult question if you can just go back to the way you were. But I dream...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Thanks for making that point .
I looked up information on rods and cones .
Apparently cones are responsible for high-resolution vision ( near the center of your visual field ) AND for color vision .
The site I found says that for the cones , 64 \ % are red , 32 \ % are green , and 2 \ % are blue .
The cones in a color blind person still work , they just are n't divided into red or green cones .
You give up color perception in favor of higher visual acuity.It would be interesting if this was something that was reversible .
If someone could " try out " color vision , or color blindness for that matter , and choose to keep it or not .
It 's much less of a difficult question if you can just go back to the way you were .
But I dream.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Thanks for making that point.
I looked up information on rods and cones.
Apparently cones are responsible for high-resolution vision (near the center of your visual field) AND for color vision.
The site I found says that for the cones, 64\% are red, 32\% are green, and 2\% are blue.
The cones in a color blind person still work, they just aren't divided into red or green cones.
You give up color perception in favor of higher visual acuity.It would be interesting if this was something that was reversible.
If someone could "try out" color vision, or color blindness for that matter, and choose to keep it or not.
It's much less of a difficult question if you can just go back to the way you were.
But I dream...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635638</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31637160</id>
	<title>Immoral?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269628260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It is only wrong if the cures and modifications are limited to the wealthy. Curing, Diabetes/Color blindness/Amputations/Disease/Deformities/etc etc is not the same as coveting a Rolls Royce. Technology will advance and we will integrate it into our selves. It was not that long ago, flight belonged solely to birds and people died of numerous plagues by the millions. Is it immoral to fly in a plane or take antibiotics? To some it is. There are also a few who believe the world is flat, even more who believe we never set foot on the moon. This is the very same frontier. Only the generations change. Dont sail there... You will fall off the earth. Man was not meant to fly. Antibiotics will cause insanity. The moon can not be reached by mortal men. Nuclear weapons will detonate the atmosphere. The Hadron Collider will create a black hole. Genetic cures will only be available to the wealthy... Ad nauseam... Anti-biotics are available to most, most of us can afford to fly. The only disadvantage is generational. Early on, only the wealthy could afford travel, medicine, flight, orbital excursions, name any advancement, plumbing, electricity, cars, phones, cell phones, hair replacement, at their advent the well to do were the only patrons. Were any of these advancements (any you can name) immoral? If that is the case then we should head back to the fields and forests to forage.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It is only wrong if the cures and modifications are limited to the wealthy .
Curing , Diabetes/Color blindness/Amputations/Disease/Deformities/etc etc is not the same as coveting a Rolls Royce .
Technology will advance and we will integrate it into our selves .
It was not that long ago , flight belonged solely to birds and people died of numerous plagues by the millions .
Is it immoral to fly in a plane or take antibiotics ?
To some it is .
There are also a few who believe the world is flat , even more who believe we never set foot on the moon .
This is the very same frontier .
Only the generations change .
Dont sail there... You will fall off the earth .
Man was not meant to fly .
Antibiotics will cause insanity .
The moon can not be reached by mortal men .
Nuclear weapons will detonate the atmosphere .
The Hadron Collider will create a black hole .
Genetic cures will only be available to the wealthy... Ad nauseam... Anti-biotics are available to most , most of us can afford to fly .
The only disadvantage is generational .
Early on , only the wealthy could afford travel , medicine , flight , orbital excursions , name any advancement , plumbing , electricity , cars , phones , cell phones , hair replacement , at their advent the well to do were the only patrons .
Were any of these advancements ( any you can name ) immoral ?
If that is the case then we should head back to the fields and forests to forage .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is only wrong if the cures and modifications are limited to the wealthy.
Curing, Diabetes/Color blindness/Amputations/Disease/Deformities/etc etc is not the same as coveting a Rolls Royce.
Technology will advance and we will integrate it into our selves.
It was not that long ago, flight belonged solely to birds and people died of numerous plagues by the millions.
Is it immoral to fly in a plane or take antibiotics?
To some it is.
There are also a few who believe the world is flat, even more who believe we never set foot on the moon.
This is the very same frontier.
Only the generations change.
Dont sail there... You will fall off the earth.
Man was not meant to fly.
Antibiotics will cause insanity.
The moon can not be reached by mortal men.
Nuclear weapons will detonate the atmosphere.
The Hadron Collider will create a black hole.
Genetic cures will only be available to the wealthy... Ad nauseam... Anti-biotics are available to most, most of us can afford to fly.
The only disadvantage is generational.
Early on, only the wealthy could afford travel, medicine, flight, orbital excursions, name any advancement, plumbing, electricity, cars, phones, cell phones, hair replacement, at their advent the well to do were the only patrons.
Were any of these advancements (any you can name) immoral?
If that is the case then we should head back to the fields and forests to forage.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31637438</id>
	<title>Just wait...</title>
	<author>feepness</author>
	<datestamp>1269633480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>...till they find the gene to "cure" homosexuality.  Hoo boy.</htmltext>
<tokenext>...till they find the gene to " cure " homosexuality .
Hoo boy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...till they find the gene to "cure" homosexuality.
Hoo boy.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635062</id>
	<title>just revert the repo to an earlier version</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269612600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>sometimes moral questions are just dumb - is it moral to repeat them?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>sometimes moral questions are just dumb - is it moral to repeat them ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>sometimes moral questions are just dumb - is it moral to repeat them?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31636126</id>
	<title>Only a socialist would ask a question this stupid.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269619200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In a free society individuals own themselves (and parents have substantial rights over their children).</p><p>Whether a specific medical alternative -- or abortion, or euthanasia, etc -- is "moral" is a matter of individual choice.</p><p>(Signed:  Alex Libman's sock-puppet.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In a free society individuals own themselves ( and parents have substantial rights over their children ) .Whether a specific medical alternative -- or abortion , or euthanasia , etc -- is " moral " is a matter of individual choice .
( Signed : Alex Libman 's sock-puppet .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In a free society individuals own themselves (and parents have substantial rights over their children).Whether a specific medical alternative -- or abortion, or euthanasia, etc -- is "moral" is a matter of individual choice.
(Signed:  Alex Libman's sock-puppet.
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31640604</id>
	<title>Re:As noted by others</title>
	<author>JesterJosh</author>
	<datestamp>1269712620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Reminds me of Vinge Vernor's spider people in Fire Upon the Deep seeing in "plaid".</htmltext>
<tokenext>Reminds me of Vinge Vernor 's spider people in Fire Upon the Deep seeing in " plaid " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Reminds me of Vinge Vernor's spider people in Fire Upon the Deep seeing in "plaid".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635086</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31637330</id>
	<title>What arrogance!</title>
	<author>roc97007</author>
	<datestamp>1269631080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
I'm red/green colorblind.  Don't I get a say in whether I get that corrected?
</p><p>
Is this the culmination of the "differently abled" nonsense?  I know -- let's ban glasses.  It's morally wrong for people to be "forced" to be able to read street signs.
</p><p>
Bah!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm red/green colorblind .
Do n't I get a say in whether I get that corrected ?
Is this the culmination of the " differently abled " nonsense ?
I know -- let 's ban glasses .
It 's morally wrong for people to be " forced " to be able to read street signs .
Bah !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
I'm red/green colorblind.
Don't I get a say in whether I get that corrected?
Is this the culmination of the "differently abled" nonsense?
I know -- let's ban glasses.
It's morally wrong for people to be "forced" to be able to read street signs.
Bah!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31636656</id>
	<title>Improvement choice?</title>
	<author>alexandre</author>
	<datestamp>1269623700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Would you like to see infra red light?<br>Would you like to hear super sonic sounds?</p><p>Fuck yeah!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Would you like to see infra red light ? Would you like to hear super sonic sounds ? Fuck yeah !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Would you like to see infra red light?Would you like to hear super sonic sounds?Fuck yeah!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31639812</id>
	<title>Re:The Qualia beast raises its head again</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269707940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I actually read an account of a color-blind person with synesthesia. Some colors he could only see as the result of synesthetic effects. He referred to them as "Martian colors" because he did not see them as existing in the real world. This would suggest that color-blindness does neither changes the space of visible colors nor remap the seen colors to that space.</p><p>Which also suggests that if you make simple changes of the kind suggested in the article with an eye to enhancement (as it were), you would have to choose between seeing UV or IR and seeing things the way you're used to seeing them. People's faces, for example, would look very, very weird, and I can easily imagine missing the experience of seeing faces normally.</p><p>That's not to say that you couldn't get around this, by turning the ability on and off, or rewiring the brain, or whatever, but the point I want to make is that everything has trade-offs. There's no such thing as a free lunch. You can have some fantasy of having exactly always precisely the set of abilities that you want, but you can't have that, and you never will, even if the cost of switching between abilities is very low. Lowering that cost is what technology does, but technology doesn't eliminate the limitations of physical reality.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I actually read an account of a color-blind person with synesthesia .
Some colors he could only see as the result of synesthetic effects .
He referred to them as " Martian colors " because he did not see them as existing in the real world .
This would suggest that color-blindness does neither changes the space of visible colors nor remap the seen colors to that space.Which also suggests that if you make simple changes of the kind suggested in the article with an eye to enhancement ( as it were ) , you would have to choose between seeing UV or IR and seeing things the way you 're used to seeing them .
People 's faces , for example , would look very , very weird , and I can easily imagine missing the experience of seeing faces normally.That 's not to say that you could n't get around this , by turning the ability on and off , or rewiring the brain , or whatever , but the point I want to make is that everything has trade-offs .
There 's no such thing as a free lunch .
You can have some fantasy of having exactly always precisely the set of abilities that you want , but you ca n't have that , and you never will , even if the cost of switching between abilities is very low .
Lowering that cost is what technology does , but technology does n't eliminate the limitations of physical reality .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I actually read an account of a color-blind person with synesthesia.
Some colors he could only see as the result of synesthetic effects.
He referred to them as "Martian colors" because he did not see them as existing in the real world.
This would suggest that color-blindness does neither changes the space of visible colors nor remap the seen colors to that space.Which also suggests that if you make simple changes of the kind suggested in the article with an eye to enhancement (as it were), you would have to choose between seeing UV or IR and seeing things the way you're used to seeing them.
People's faces, for example, would look very, very weird, and I can easily imagine missing the experience of seeing faces normally.That's not to say that you couldn't get around this, by turning the ability on and off, or rewiring the brain, or whatever, but the point I want to make is that everything has trade-offs.
There's no such thing as a free lunch.
You can have some fantasy of having exactly always precisely the set of abilities that you want, but you can't have that, and you never will, even if the cost of switching between abilities is very low.
Lowering that cost is what technology does, but technology doesn't eliminate the limitations of physical reality.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31634968</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635086</id>
	<title>As noted by others</title>
	<author>Ralph Spoilsport</author>
	<datestamp>1269612660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Hell - I'd love to have a tatrachrome vision palette. Heck - I'd go for infrared, UV, even radio would be cool. Now, how I would "understand" these new "colours" (which like other colours are simply ranges of EM frequency) is beyond me, especially given as how my brain didn't evolve to decode them. But it would still be totally k3vvL in my book.
<p>
Infrared could be very cool. Especially looking at this girl who's often on my homebound bus ride...
</p><p>
Nhhhnnngngngngnggggnnnn...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hell - I 'd love to have a tatrachrome vision palette .
Heck - I 'd go for infrared , UV , even radio would be cool .
Now , how I would " understand " these new " colours " ( which like other colours are simply ranges of EM frequency ) is beyond me , especially given as how my brain did n't evolve to decode them .
But it would still be totally k3vvL in my book .
Infrared could be very cool .
Especially looking at this girl who 's often on my homebound bus ride.. . Nhhhnnngngngngnggggnnnn.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hell - I'd love to have a tatrachrome vision palette.
Heck - I'd go for infrared, UV, even radio would be cool.
Now, how I would "understand" these new "colours" (which like other colours are simply ranges of EM frequency) is beyond me, especially given as how my brain didn't evolve to decode them.
But it would still be totally k3vvL in my book.
Infrared could be very cool.
Especially looking at this girl who's often on my homebound bus ride...

Nhhhnnngngngngnggggnnnn...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31636790</id>
	<title>I'll make a deal...</title>
	<author>gorehog</author>
	<datestamp>1269624720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Either let me cure my colorblindness or EVERYONE has to stop using red/green LEDS for status lights.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Either let me cure my colorblindness or EVERYONE has to stop using red/green LEDS for status lights .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Either let me cure my colorblindness or EVERYONE has to stop using red/green LEDS for status lights.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31636666</id>
	<title>No more wrong</title>
	<author>spyder-implee</author>
	<datestamp>1269623820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Than curing Diabetes. Sure this bitch wouldn't be speaking up if that was the case.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Than curing Diabetes .
Sure this bitch would n't be speaking up if that was the case .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Than curing Diabetes.
Sure this bitch wouldn't be speaking up if that was the case.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635424</id>
	<title>Re:Consenting adults</title>
	<author>einhverfr</author>
	<datestamp>1269614700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sure.</p><p>But what about children.  Should they have the right to wait until they can make consenting decisions?</p><p>I wouldn't mind saying "requires the subject to be over 18 years of age and consenting."  I get worried about letting parents decide they want their kids to be "normal."</p><p>Where does it end?  "I want my kid to be light skinned, blue eyed, and blond.  Please give him/her a virus for that!"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sure.But what about children .
Should they have the right to wait until they can make consenting decisions ? I would n't mind saying " requires the subject to be over 18 years of age and consenting .
" I get worried about letting parents decide they want their kids to be " normal .
" Where does it end ?
" I want my kid to be light skinned , blue eyed , and blond .
Please give him/her a virus for that !
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sure.But what about children.
Should they have the right to wait until they can make consenting decisions?I wouldn't mind saying "requires the subject to be over 18 years of age and consenting.
"  I get worried about letting parents decide they want their kids to be "normal.
"Where does it end?
"I want my kid to be light skinned, blue eyed, and blond.
Please give him/her a virus for that!
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31634950</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31636360</id>
	<title>NO!</title>
	<author>wolrahnaes</author>
	<datestamp>1269620880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Simple, no it wouldn't.  It's curing a disability.  A minor one by most standards, but a disability no less.</p><p>Some people think this would lead to "curing" normal differences like height, build, race, etc.  The way I look at it, the way to distinguish difference from disability is whether it would affect the person if they were stranded on a desert island.  Deaf?  Color blind?  Unable to smell?  Disability.  Shorter than average or a different skin color?  Difference. (note that height can fall in to disability when taken to extremes, I'm talking normal variation levels)</p><p>I'm also with the poster from #31635162 in that deaf parents who actively try for deaf children are evil and should not be allowed to have kids.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Simple , no it would n't .
It 's curing a disability .
A minor one by most standards , but a disability no less.Some people think this would lead to " curing " normal differences like height , build , race , etc .
The way I look at it , the way to distinguish difference from disability is whether it would affect the person if they were stranded on a desert island .
Deaf ? Color blind ?
Unable to smell ?
Disability. Shorter than average or a different skin color ?
Difference. ( note that height can fall in to disability when taken to extremes , I 'm talking normal variation levels ) I 'm also with the poster from # 31635162 in that deaf parents who actively try for deaf children are evil and should not be allowed to have kids .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Simple, no it wouldn't.
It's curing a disability.
A minor one by most standards, but a disability no less.Some people think this would lead to "curing" normal differences like height, build, race, etc.
The way I look at it, the way to distinguish difference from disability is whether it would affect the person if they were stranded on a desert island.
Deaf?  Color blind?
Unable to smell?
Disability.  Shorter than average or a different skin color?
Difference. (note that height can fall in to disability when taken to extremes, I'm talking normal variation levels)I'm also with the poster from #31635162 in that deaf parents who actively try for deaf children are evil and should not be allowed to have kids.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31638766</id>
	<title>Harrison Bergeron</title>
	<author>Insightfill</author>
	<datestamp>1269698160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>We could just go the other way and make everyone else color-blind, like in <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harrison\_Bergeron" title="wikipedia.org">Harrison Bergeron</a> [wikipedia.org].</htmltext>
<tokenext>We could just go the other way and make everyone else color-blind , like in Harrison Bergeron [ wikipedia.org ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We could just go the other way and make everyone else color-blind, like in Harrison Bergeron [wikipedia.org].</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31636314</id>
	<title>Re:No.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269620640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>No.  It's not "normalization".  Being able to differentiate between colors is incredibly valuable.</p><p>Now if they were researching gene therapy to make swarthy folks more acceptably white we might have something to complain about.</p><p>In a related note: If I could get gene therapy to let me see further into the UV and IR ranges I'd totally go for it.</p></div><p>Another consideration... if there were gene therapy to make swarthy folks more acceptably white then the converse should also be true.  Therapy to make acceptable white folks more swarthy should be possible as well.</p><p>Ditto if genes for sexual preference exist.</p><p>And as far as altering my eyes to see into currently non-visible spectra, oh hell yes!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>No .
It 's not " normalization " .
Being able to differentiate between colors is incredibly valuable.Now if they were researching gene therapy to make swarthy folks more acceptably white we might have something to complain about.In a related note : If I could get gene therapy to let me see further into the UV and IR ranges I 'd totally go for it.Another consideration... if there were gene therapy to make swarthy folks more acceptably white then the converse should also be true .
Therapy to make acceptable white folks more swarthy should be possible as well.Ditto if genes for sexual preference exist.And as far as altering my eyes to see into currently non-visible spectra , oh hell yes !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No.
It's not "normalization".
Being able to differentiate between colors is incredibly valuable.Now if they were researching gene therapy to make swarthy folks more acceptably white we might have something to complain about.In a related note: If I could get gene therapy to let me see further into the UV and IR ranges I'd totally go for it.Another consideration... if there were gene therapy to make swarthy folks more acceptably white then the converse should also be true.
Therapy to make acceptable white folks more swarthy should be possible as well.Ditto if genes for sexual preference exist.And as far as altering my eyes to see into currently non-visible spectra, oh hell yes!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635022</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31639360</id>
	<title>Re:What the... I don't even...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269704220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, it's the same as asking if breast enhancements are morally wrong.  After all, it, too, is due to faulty genetics.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , it 's the same as asking if breast enhancements are morally wrong .
After all , it , too , is due to faulty genetics .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, it's the same as asking if breast enhancements are morally wrong.
After all, it, too, is due to faulty genetics.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31634942</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31643330</id>
	<title>Re:The Qualia beast raises its head again</title>
	<author>Twinbee</author>
	<datestamp>1269690840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>That can be determined experimentally as well, both by sticking electrodes into brains, and by performing clever experiments.</p></div><p>There's no way we can guarantee that someone's idea of blue isn't someone else's idea of red.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>No, it doesn't mean "probably", it means they can actually only see one color.</p></div><p>How do we know that they don't sense colour and light through their other senses to a degree, or even take a brighter shade as being more reddish, and a darker shade as being more bluish? Granted, it's pretty improbable, but there's still a non-zero percent chance. The point is, with Qualia it's impossible to tell.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Just lower the lights until your night vision kicks in. Voila, you have monochromatic vision too.</p></div><p>Again, we still can't say for sure whether they're seeing grey in that situation (like we do in night vision), or some other hue such as red, or blue. You're assuming they see shades of grey like us, but you can't be sure.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>That can be determined experimentally as well , both by sticking electrodes into brains , and by performing clever experiments.There 's no way we can guarantee that someone 's idea of blue is n't someone else 's idea of red.No , it does n't mean " probably " , it means they can actually only see one color.How do we know that they do n't sense colour and light through their other senses to a degree , or even take a brighter shade as being more reddish , and a darker shade as being more bluish ?
Granted , it 's pretty improbable , but there 's still a non-zero percent chance .
The point is , with Qualia it 's impossible to tell.Just lower the lights until your night vision kicks in .
Voila , you have monochromatic vision too.Again , we still ca n't say for sure whether they 're seeing grey in that situation ( like we do in night vision ) , or some other hue such as red , or blue .
You 're assuming they see shades of grey like us , but you ca n't be sure .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That can be determined experimentally as well, both by sticking electrodes into brains, and by performing clever experiments.There's no way we can guarantee that someone's idea of blue isn't someone else's idea of red.No, it doesn't mean "probably", it means they can actually only see one color.How do we know that they don't sense colour and light through their other senses to a degree, or even take a brighter shade as being more reddish, and a darker shade as being more bluish?
Granted, it's pretty improbable, but there's still a non-zero percent chance.
The point is, with Qualia it's impossible to tell.Just lower the lights until your night vision kicks in.
Voila, you have monochromatic vision too.Again, we still can't say for sure whether they're seeing grey in that situation (like we do in night vision), or some other hue such as red, or blue.
You're assuming they see shades of grey like us, but you can't be sure.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635144</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635490</id>
	<title>Re:as an extreme red-green colorblind person...</title>
	<author>einhverfr</author>
	<datestamp>1269615060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My moral objection is limited to "curing" children of this "disability."</p><p>If an adult wants it, fine.  Quite frankly, I don't care if an adult wants gene therapy to be lighter skinned/darker skinned/whatever.  People already do a lot of plastic surgery regarding image, and producing darker skin might be better for the health than a tanning salon.</p><p>However, let the kid grow to be 18 years old and make up his/her own mind.  The slippery slope is limited IMO to the designer baby issue.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My moral objection is limited to " curing " children of this " disability .
" If an adult wants it , fine .
Quite frankly , I do n't care if an adult wants gene therapy to be lighter skinned/darker skinned/whatever .
People already do a lot of plastic surgery regarding image , and producing darker skin might be better for the health than a tanning salon.However , let the kid grow to be 18 years old and make up his/her own mind .
The slippery slope is limited IMO to the designer baby issue .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My moral objection is limited to "curing" children of this "disability.
"If an adult wants it, fine.
Quite frankly, I don't care if an adult wants gene therapy to be lighter skinned/darker skinned/whatever.
People already do a lot of plastic surgery regarding image, and producing darker skin might be better for the health than a tanning salon.However, let the kid grow to be 18 years old and make up his/her own mind.
The slippery slope is limited IMO to the designer baby issue.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635070</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31652768</id>
	<title>Forget namby-pamby moralizing over colorblindness</title>
	<author>bobvious</author>
	<datestamp>1269791820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm bald in red, green, blue, monochrome, or acoustic emissions (for any bats reading this). And the blind would figure it out if I let them. The question is will this approach cure baldness? If colorblindness is a by-product, that's fine with me.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm bald in red , green , blue , monochrome , or acoustic emissions ( for any bats reading this ) .
And the blind would figure it out if I let them .
The question is will this approach cure baldness ?
If colorblindness is a by-product , that 's fine with me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm bald in red, green, blue, monochrome, or acoustic emissions (for any bats reading this).
And the blind would figure it out if I let them.
The question is will this approach cure baldness?
If colorblindness is a by-product, that's fine with me.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635260</id>
	<title>Anti-cure is a Rawlsian bitch</title>
	<author>noshellswill</author>
	<datestamp>1269613680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Some folks just NEED dependents<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... feebs &amp; crips and "inferiors" who lick the helpers-hand -- building their ego and validating their power. Case-in-point<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... right\_sighting the color\_blind. Wonder what the NEXT helper\_be\_gone genetic horror will be: slobbering stroke-victims standing up straight, spitting sunflower seeds and doing their numbers ?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Some folks just NEED dependents ... feebs &amp; crips and " inferiors " who lick the helpers-hand -- building their ego and validating their power .
Case-in-point ... right \ _sighting the color \ _blind .
Wonder what the NEXT helper \ _be \ _gone genetic horror will be : slobbering stroke-victims standing up straight , spitting sunflower seeds and doing their numbers ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Some folks just NEED dependents ... feebs &amp; crips and "inferiors" who lick the helpers-hand -- building their ego and validating their power.
Case-in-point ... right\_sighting the color\_blind.
Wonder what the NEXT helper\_be\_gone genetic horror will be: slobbering stroke-victims standing up straight, spitting sunflower seeds and doing their numbers ?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31636514</id>
	<title>that is an easy question to answer</title>
	<author>axor1337</author>
	<datestamp>1269622440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>If I want the "cure" then fine But should I be forced to receive it (like maybe due to a Military Draft) HELL NO.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If I want the " cure " then fine But should I be forced to receive it ( like maybe due to a Military Draft ) HELL NO .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If I want the "cure" then fine But should I be forced to receive it (like maybe due to a Military Draft) HELL NO.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635906</id>
	<title>Re:The Qualia beast raises its head again</title>
	<author>zippthorne</author>
	<datestamp>1269617640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No, he's talking about a philosophical matter that we will never, ever be able to know.  It's a thought exercise that young children often engage in to entertain themselves, although ultimately, the answer is "mu"</p><p>Two people can agree on a color, and point to the same color by the same name, but is it internally also the same?  Could someone see a world where red looks like what you see blue as?  You'd call them by the same name, because you attached those names based on common experience, but does the internal "representation" have any reality?</p><p>You can't determine it experimentally any more than you can measure what someone "hears" when they read a book.  And maybe even less likely than that.</p><p>He's trying to imagine what it would be like to see four colors instead of three, which is an exercise that is probably as difficult and meaningful as a monochrome-viewer to imagine two or three colors, or a flatlander to imagine a three-dimensional world.  Ultimately, i'd guess "not only an extra color, but a whole extra bunch of <em>combinations</em> of colors with a more complex system of complementary colors."  But I can only see the standard 3, so I can't really imagine it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No , he 's talking about a philosophical matter that we will never , ever be able to know .
It 's a thought exercise that young children often engage in to entertain themselves , although ultimately , the answer is " mu " Two people can agree on a color , and point to the same color by the same name , but is it internally also the same ?
Could someone see a world where red looks like what you see blue as ?
You 'd call them by the same name , because you attached those names based on common experience , but does the internal " representation " have any reality ? You ca n't determine it experimentally any more than you can measure what someone " hears " when they read a book .
And maybe even less likely than that.He 's trying to imagine what it would be like to see four colors instead of three , which is an exercise that is probably as difficult and meaningful as a monochrome-viewer to imagine two or three colors , or a flatlander to imagine a three-dimensional world .
Ultimately , i 'd guess " not only an extra color , but a whole extra bunch of combinations of colors with a more complex system of complementary colors .
" But I can only see the standard 3 , so I ca n't really imagine it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, he's talking about a philosophical matter that we will never, ever be able to know.
It's a thought exercise that young children often engage in to entertain themselves, although ultimately, the answer is "mu"Two people can agree on a color, and point to the same color by the same name, but is it internally also the same?
Could someone see a world where red looks like what you see blue as?
You'd call them by the same name, because you attached those names based on common experience, but does the internal "representation" have any reality?You can't determine it experimentally any more than you can measure what someone "hears" when they read a book.
And maybe even less likely than that.He's trying to imagine what it would be like to see four colors instead of three, which is an exercise that is probably as difficult and meaningful as a monochrome-viewer to imagine two or three colors, or a flatlander to imagine a three-dimensional world.
Ultimately, i'd guess "not only an extra color, but a whole extra bunch of combinations of colors with a more complex system of complementary colors.
"  But I can only see the standard 3, so I can't really imagine it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635144</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31650982</id>
	<title>Give me the full palette!</title>
	<author>andrewwarrenau</author>
	<datestamp>1269775200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Screw the self-serving pontificating.  I'm colourblind and would give a great deal not to be.  Part of my body is incapable of performing basic operations that others do with ease - if that's not a disability I don't know what is.

If there's a fix, and it's affordable, I'm grabbing it with both hands!

I respect the views of other colourblind people who feel differently about their condition, but it's pretty offensive to be told by people with perfect colour vision that I should be happy with my lot, or that people shouldn't "judge", or whatever PC crap happens to be the flavour of the day.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Screw the self-serving pontificating .
I 'm colourblind and would give a great deal not to be .
Part of my body is incapable of performing basic operations that others do with ease - if that 's not a disability I do n't know what is .
If there 's a fix , and it 's affordable , I 'm grabbing it with both hands !
I respect the views of other colourblind people who feel differently about their condition , but it 's pretty offensive to be told by people with perfect colour vision that I should be happy with my lot , or that people should n't " judge " , or whatever PC crap happens to be the flavour of the day .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Screw the self-serving pontificating.
I'm colourblind and would give a great deal not to be.
Part of my body is incapable of performing basic operations that others do with ease - if that's not a disability I don't know what is.
If there's a fix, and it's affordable, I'm grabbing it with both hands!
I respect the views of other colourblind people who feel differently about their condition, but it's pretty offensive to be told by people with perfect colour vision that I should be happy with my lot, or that people shouldn't "judge", or whatever PC crap happens to be the flavour of the day.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31636154</id>
	<title>Re:as an extreme red-green colorblind person...</title>
	<author>IckySplat</author>
	<datestamp>1269619440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The slippery slope is limited IMO to the designer baby issue.</p></div><p>But when radical gene therapy becomes available, the child wouldn't be stuck with what his/her parents wanted. so no worries.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The slippery slope is limited IMO to the designer baby issue.But when radical gene therapy becomes available , the child would n't be stuck with what his/her parents wanted .
so no worries .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The slippery slope is limited IMO to the designer baby issue.But when radical gene therapy becomes available, the child wouldn't be stuck with what his/her parents wanted.
so no worries.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635490</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31639566</id>
	<title>Conspiracy!!</title>
	<author>hammeraxe</author>
	<datestamp>1269705960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm colourblind (at least that's what they say). I think, though, that everyone else sees the world wrong: it's a massive consipracy against me.</p><p>The only trouble I've had with this is that I had to cheat in the vision test when getting my drivers license. It went surprisingly well<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:P</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm colourblind ( at least that 's what they say ) .
I think , though , that everyone else sees the world wrong : it 's a massive consipracy against me.The only trouble I 've had with this is that I had to cheat in the vision test when getting my drivers license .
It went surprisingly well : P</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm colourblind (at least that's what they say).
I think, though, that everyone else sees the world wrong: it's a massive consipracy against me.The only trouble I've had with this is that I had to cheat in the vision test when getting my drivers license.
It went surprisingly well :P</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635376</id>
	<title>Propagation of (dis)abilities</title>
	<author>benjamindees</author>
	<datestamp>1269614340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The thought occurred to me that many mutations that are disabling below some certain threshold would tend to propagate, due to the selective advantage of having a set of two parents with similar genetic defects, and the tendency of people to seek out mates with similar habits and abilities.</p><p>So, for instance, a deaf child with two deaf parents would tend to do better than a deaf child with only one deaf parent.  And a deaf person might seek out a deaf mate.  So this (even small) selective pressure would over time tend to segregate people by major disability and help to propagate them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The thought occurred to me that many mutations that are disabling below some certain threshold would tend to propagate , due to the selective advantage of having a set of two parents with similar genetic defects , and the tendency of people to seek out mates with similar habits and abilities.So , for instance , a deaf child with two deaf parents would tend to do better than a deaf child with only one deaf parent .
And a deaf person might seek out a deaf mate .
So this ( even small ) selective pressure would over time tend to segregate people by major disability and help to propagate them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The thought occurred to me that many mutations that are disabling below some certain threshold would tend to propagate, due to the selective advantage of having a set of two parents with similar genetic defects, and the tendency of people to seek out mates with similar habits and abilities.So, for instance, a deaf child with two deaf parents would tend to do better than a deaf child with only one deaf parent.
And a deaf person might seek out a deaf mate.
So this (even small) selective pressure would over time tend to segregate people by major disability and help to propagate them.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635850</id>
	<title>Choosing genetic disorders</title>
	<author>TeethWhitener</author>
	<datestamp>1269617220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This brings up an interesting point.  If we can use gene therapy to cure colorblindness or extend our senses, couldn't we also use it to give us certain disabilities to take advantage of handicapped laws?  Or maybe we could change out our skin colors like the cool kids do with their ringtones.  Or perhaps we could customize our abilities like we do our computers.  Some of us may want a bare-bones system (literally?) or to be stripped of stuff we don't really need (like a complete vas deferns or Fallopian tube until we're ready to reproduce).  I've seen a few commenters talking about a slippery slope, but what if you want to go skiing for a while (just to completely milk that metaphor)?</htmltext>
<tokenext>This brings up an interesting point .
If we can use gene therapy to cure colorblindness or extend our senses , could n't we also use it to give us certain disabilities to take advantage of handicapped laws ?
Or maybe we could change out our skin colors like the cool kids do with their ringtones .
Or perhaps we could customize our abilities like we do our computers .
Some of us may want a bare-bones system ( literally ?
) or to be stripped of stuff we do n't really need ( like a complete vas deferns or Fallopian tube until we 're ready to reproduce ) .
I 've seen a few commenters talking about a slippery slope , but what if you want to go skiing for a while ( just to completely milk that metaphor ) ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This brings up an interesting point.
If we can use gene therapy to cure colorblindness or extend our senses, couldn't we also use it to give us certain disabilities to take advantage of handicapped laws?
Or maybe we could change out our skin colors like the cool kids do with their ringtones.
Or perhaps we could customize our abilities like we do our computers.
Some of us may want a bare-bones system (literally?
) or to be stripped of stuff we don't really need (like a complete vas deferns or Fallopian tube until we're ready to reproduce).
I've seen a few commenters talking about a slippery slope, but what if you want to go skiing for a while (just to completely milk that metaphor)?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31637220</id>
	<title>I disagree.</title>
	<author>hallux.sinister</author>
	<datestamp>1269629280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Folks, most of the posts on here seem to be jokes about upgrades to vision.  I have a mild form of the red/green thing, and to me, there is no moral dilemma, to fix or not to fix.  Rather than extrapolating the point of view that there are moral implications towards people augmenting nature, consider the opposite.  If it is morally questionable to help someone see the entire "normal visible spectrum", then it should be considered just as morally iffy to fix someone who is nearsighted, farsighted, or has astigmatism, myopia, etc.  If we can fix, by adding an appropriate lens, or by using a laser to adjust the shape of the lens, if we can, without having any trouble sleeping at night, then I think we CAN in fact do this, because it's not really any different from what is done when people are given canes to walk with, or hearing aids to hear better with.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Folks , most of the posts on here seem to be jokes about upgrades to vision .
I have a mild form of the red/green thing , and to me , there is no moral dilemma , to fix or not to fix .
Rather than extrapolating the point of view that there are moral implications towards people augmenting nature , consider the opposite .
If it is morally questionable to help someone see the entire " normal visible spectrum " , then it should be considered just as morally iffy to fix someone who is nearsighted , farsighted , or has astigmatism , myopia , etc .
If we can fix , by adding an appropriate lens , or by using a laser to adjust the shape of the lens , if we can , without having any trouble sleeping at night , then I think we CAN in fact do this , because it 's not really any different from what is done when people are given canes to walk with , or hearing aids to hear better with .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Folks, most of the posts on here seem to be jokes about upgrades to vision.
I have a mild form of the red/green thing, and to me, there is no moral dilemma, to fix or not to fix.
Rather than extrapolating the point of view that there are moral implications towards people augmenting nature, consider the opposite.
If it is morally questionable to help someone see the entire "normal visible spectrum", then it should be considered just as morally iffy to fix someone who is nearsighted, farsighted, or has astigmatism, myopia, etc.
If we can fix, by adding an appropriate lens, or by using a laser to adjust the shape of the lens, if we can, without having any trouble sleeping at night, then I think we CAN in fact do this, because it's not really any different from what is done when people are given canes to walk with, or hearing aids to hear better with.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31636174</id>
	<title>Safety Benefits</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269619560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As someone who is red-green colorblind, this would be enormously helpful. Think about all of the simple "safe vs unsafe" signals that most folks take for granted (status LEDs on routers/computers, red vs green channel markers for the nautical types out there and radar screens in airplanes).</p><p>Forcing everyone to do this would be bad, but I would volunteer to be at the front of the line for this kind of treatment.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As someone who is red-green colorblind , this would be enormously helpful .
Think about all of the simple " safe vs unsafe " signals that most folks take for granted ( status LEDs on routers/computers , red vs green channel markers for the nautical types out there and radar screens in airplanes ) .Forcing everyone to do this would be bad , but I would volunteer to be at the front of the line for this kind of treatment .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As someone who is red-green colorblind, this would be enormously helpful.
Think about all of the simple "safe vs unsafe" signals that most folks take for granted (status LEDs on routers/computers, red vs green channel markers for the nautical types out there and radar screens in airplanes).Forcing everyone to do this would be bad, but I would volunteer to be at the front of the line for this kind of treatment.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31639106</id>
	<title>Re:I'll do it... but...</title>
	<author>khallow</author>
	<datestamp>1269701520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If I were ever a juror and had to decide on a case that was based on eyewitness testimony I do not care how I felt, I'd dismiss it entirely.</p> </div><p>Why? That is not the role of a juror or indeed a rational person to discard evidence a priori, especially given that your claim for universally rejecting eyewitness testimony is that there's no universal knowledge. Heal thyself, physician.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If I were ever a juror and had to decide on a case that was based on eyewitness testimony I do not care how I felt , I 'd dismiss it entirely .
Why ? That is not the role of a juror or indeed a rational person to discard evidence a priori , especially given that your claim for universally rejecting eyewitness testimony is that there 's no universal knowledge .
Heal thyself , physician .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If I were ever a juror and had to decide on a case that was based on eyewitness testimony I do not care how I felt, I'd dismiss it entirely.
Why? That is not the role of a juror or indeed a rational person to discard evidence a priori, especially given that your claim for universally rejecting eyewitness testimony is that there's no universal knowledge.
Heal thyself, physician.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31636466</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635040</id>
	<title>Re:What the... I don't even...</title>
	<author>Brett Buck</author>
	<datestamp>1269612480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>     What kind of stupid, half-witted, pseudo-concern is this? This is the same as asking if a cure for cancer is morally wrong;</p></div></blockquote><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Welcome to slashdot!</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Seriously, there are those who consider a lot of what are generally considered defects/handicaps/etc "communities" that should be preserved. Deafness, for instance, autism as another. I think it's asinine but it's on-point to the question.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What kind of stupid , half-witted , pseudo-concern is this ?
This is the same as asking if a cure for cancer is morally wrong ;             Welcome to slashdot !
          Seriously , there are those who consider a lot of what are generally considered defects/handicaps/etc " communities " that should be preserved .
Deafness , for instance , autism as another .
I think it 's asinine but it 's on-point to the question .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>     What kind of stupid, half-witted, pseudo-concern is this?
This is the same as asking if a cure for cancer is morally wrong;
            Welcome to slashdot!
          Seriously, there are those who consider a lot of what are generally considered defects/handicaps/etc "communities" that should be preserved.
Deafness, for instance, autism as another.
I think it's asinine but it's on-point to the question.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31634942</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635780</id>
	<title>Morally wrong? ITS AN ADVERTISEMENT!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269616680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Obvious advertisement is obvious!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Obvious advertisement is obvious !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Obvious advertisement is obvious!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31636342</id>
	<title>drawing the line</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269620820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Those that lambasted the person asking the question are both ignorant and stupid. First, such a question is designed to begin at may seem to be an innocuous choice and then progress through the various 'levels' at which different people 'draw the line'.  Some are going to say creating enormous gilled low IQ undersea manual laborers is fine. Others will have other points of inherent "badness" and their own rational for those choices. Intelligent people understand that others may have data, analysis, or creative theories to share. They may also understand that even "wrong" or irrational views may provide other insights into otherwise unforeseen issues.</p><p>Second, the 'normalization' of human experience and the physical 'normalization' of humans have some interesting consequences which should probably be considered. For instance, while many consider color-blindness a 'defect', one of my brothers happens to be extremely color-blind. My eyesight has always been clearly superior in finding lost objects, especially outdoors. His eyesight has always been clearly superior in detecting movement outdoors. This may be caused/influenced be an enormous number of variables, but I have noted it to generally hold true, especially among adults.   Which is 'better'? Evolution says whichever keeps you alive.</p><p>Do eyes which can see the larger spectrum require better ocular nutrition? (is there a greater cost?)<br>Do eyes which can better detect movement or at least eliminate some of the 'color clutter' from visual processing provide an advantage?</p><p>Beyond the strictly physical issues are the changes to the way different individuals interpret and understand the world around them. Who gets to decide what is normal, better, optimal? How do we measure the tradeoffs and avoid doing damage to the species? Probably something we should think about before we charge off, at least for those of us who believe that the larger grey mass between our ears is there for more than sarcastic comments and figuring out how to bash things with a tool instead of our skull.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Those that lambasted the person asking the question are both ignorant and stupid .
First , such a question is designed to begin at may seem to be an innocuous choice and then progress through the various 'levels ' at which different people 'draw the line' .
Some are going to say creating enormous gilled low IQ undersea manual laborers is fine .
Others will have other points of inherent " badness " and their own rational for those choices .
Intelligent people understand that others may have data , analysis , or creative theories to share .
They may also understand that even " wrong " or irrational views may provide other insights into otherwise unforeseen issues.Second , the 'normalization ' of human experience and the physical 'normalization ' of humans have some interesting consequences which should probably be considered .
For instance , while many consider color-blindness a 'defect ' , one of my brothers happens to be extremely color-blind .
My eyesight has always been clearly superior in finding lost objects , especially outdoors .
His eyesight has always been clearly superior in detecting movement outdoors .
This may be caused/influenced be an enormous number of variables , but I have noted it to generally hold true , especially among adults .
Which is 'better ' ?
Evolution says whichever keeps you alive.Do eyes which can see the larger spectrum require better ocular nutrition ?
( is there a greater cost ?
) Do eyes which can better detect movement or at least eliminate some of the 'color clutter ' from visual processing provide an advantage ? Beyond the strictly physical issues are the changes to the way different individuals interpret and understand the world around them .
Who gets to decide what is normal , better , optimal ?
How do we measure the tradeoffs and avoid doing damage to the species ?
Probably something we should think about before we charge off , at least for those of us who believe that the larger grey mass between our ears is there for more than sarcastic comments and figuring out how to bash things with a tool instead of our skull .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Those that lambasted the person asking the question are both ignorant and stupid.
First, such a question is designed to begin at may seem to be an innocuous choice and then progress through the various 'levels' at which different people 'draw the line'.
Some are going to say creating enormous gilled low IQ undersea manual laborers is fine.
Others will have other points of inherent "badness" and their own rational for those choices.
Intelligent people understand that others may have data, analysis, or creative theories to share.
They may also understand that even "wrong" or irrational views may provide other insights into otherwise unforeseen issues.Second, the 'normalization' of human experience and the physical 'normalization' of humans have some interesting consequences which should probably be considered.
For instance, while many consider color-blindness a 'defect', one of my brothers happens to be extremely color-blind.
My eyesight has always been clearly superior in finding lost objects, especially outdoors.
His eyesight has always been clearly superior in detecting movement outdoors.
This may be caused/influenced be an enormous number of variables, but I have noted it to generally hold true, especially among adults.
Which is 'better'?
Evolution says whichever keeps you alive.Do eyes which can see the larger spectrum require better ocular nutrition?
(is there a greater cost?
)Do eyes which can better detect movement or at least eliminate some of the 'color clutter' from visual processing provide an advantage?Beyond the strictly physical issues are the changes to the way different individuals interpret and understand the world around them.
Who gets to decide what is normal, better, optimal?
How do we measure the tradeoffs and avoid doing damage to the species?
Probably something we should think about before we charge off, at least for those of us who believe that the larger grey mass between our ears is there for more than sarcastic comments and figuring out how to bash things with a tool instead of our skull.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31636466</id>
	<title>I'll do it... but...</title>
	<author>retech</author>
	<datestamp>1269621900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's been the single most defining element to my life. Colorblindness shaped my world view from my early youth and has only served to reinforce that view.

I'm colorblind. Typically Red Green and I've known since right around my 6th birthday. My grandfather and older brother were as well and when I started getting things wrong I experimented to see if I was or not.

I'd pick crayons that had a basic title: Skyblue, Brick Red, Lemon Yellow and I'd find a selection of men and women (teachers, aunts, uncles), without the label, I'd ask them: What color is this crayon?

I found if I asked 10 separate people I got 10 answers. If I asked 10 people in a group I got about 4-6 answers and an argument amongst them. One Christmas gathering I did this and it ended up turning into a huge family argument. Granted they're a bit dysfunctional.

This taught me that we clearly live in our own shell of a world. Each of our perceptions are unique unto us. I find it a miracle that we've ever communicated or agreed on anything at all. Men already see 30\% less of the spectrum than women, yet a colorblind man will insist (very often) that he's correct. I sincerely doubt that any two people have a 100\% understanding or perception agreement on anything they experience together. If I were ever a juror and had to decide on a case that was based on eyewitness testimony I do not care how I felt, I'd dismiss it entirely. We are grossly flawed in thinking there is a universality to our understanding of our life. We live in bubbles only barely seeing into someone's bubble.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's been the single most defining element to my life .
Colorblindness shaped my world view from my early youth and has only served to reinforce that view .
I 'm colorblind .
Typically Red Green and I 've known since right around my 6th birthday .
My grandfather and older brother were as well and when I started getting things wrong I experimented to see if I was or not .
I 'd pick crayons that had a basic title : Skyblue , Brick Red , Lemon Yellow and I 'd find a selection of men and women ( teachers , aunts , uncles ) , without the label , I 'd ask them : What color is this crayon ?
I found if I asked 10 separate people I got 10 answers .
If I asked 10 people in a group I got about 4-6 answers and an argument amongst them .
One Christmas gathering I did this and it ended up turning into a huge family argument .
Granted they 're a bit dysfunctional .
This taught me that we clearly live in our own shell of a world .
Each of our perceptions are unique unto us .
I find it a miracle that we 've ever communicated or agreed on anything at all .
Men already see 30 \ % less of the spectrum than women , yet a colorblind man will insist ( very often ) that he 's correct .
I sincerely doubt that any two people have a 100 \ % understanding or perception agreement on anything they experience together .
If I were ever a juror and had to decide on a case that was based on eyewitness testimony I do not care how I felt , I 'd dismiss it entirely .
We are grossly flawed in thinking there is a universality to our understanding of our life .
We live in bubbles only barely seeing into someone 's bubble .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's been the single most defining element to my life.
Colorblindness shaped my world view from my early youth and has only served to reinforce that view.
I'm colorblind.
Typically Red Green and I've known since right around my 6th birthday.
My grandfather and older brother were as well and when I started getting things wrong I experimented to see if I was or not.
I'd pick crayons that had a basic title: Skyblue, Brick Red, Lemon Yellow and I'd find a selection of men and women (teachers, aunts, uncles), without the label, I'd ask them: What color is this crayon?
I found if I asked 10 separate people I got 10 answers.
If I asked 10 people in a group I got about 4-6 answers and an argument amongst them.
One Christmas gathering I did this and it ended up turning into a huge family argument.
Granted they're a bit dysfunctional.
This taught me that we clearly live in our own shell of a world.
Each of our perceptions are unique unto us.
I find it a miracle that we've ever communicated or agreed on anything at all.
Men already see 30\% less of the spectrum than women, yet a colorblind man will insist (very often) that he's correct.
I sincerely doubt that any two people have a 100\% understanding or perception agreement on anything they experience together.
If I were ever a juror and had to decide on a case that was based on eyewitness testimony I do not care how I felt, I'd dismiss it entirely.
We are grossly flawed in thinking there is a universality to our understanding of our life.
We live in bubbles only barely seeing into someone's bubble.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635554</id>
	<title>Re:No.</title>
	<author>TheRaven64</author>
	<datestamp>1269615420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Actually, the skin colour question is not entirely different.  Having dark skin and living in Scotland increases your chances of suffering from vitamin D deficiency.  Having light skin and living in (most of) Africa increases your chance of skin cancer.  If people thought of skin colour in a rational way, rather than as some important part of their self identity, there would probably be a lot of customers for a treatment that let them toggle their melanin production.  Unfortunately, there would probably be lots of people talking about 'betraying your heritage' or some other such nonsense.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , the skin colour question is not entirely different .
Having dark skin and living in Scotland increases your chances of suffering from vitamin D deficiency .
Having light skin and living in ( most of ) Africa increases your chance of skin cancer .
If people thought of skin colour in a rational way , rather than as some important part of their self identity , there would probably be a lot of customers for a treatment that let them toggle their melanin production .
Unfortunately , there would probably be lots of people talking about 'betraying your heritage ' or some other such nonsense .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, the skin colour question is not entirely different.
Having dark skin and living in Scotland increases your chances of suffering from vitamin D deficiency.
Having light skin and living in (most of) Africa increases your chance of skin cancer.
If people thought of skin colour in a rational way, rather than as some important part of their self identity, there would probably be a lot of customers for a treatment that let them toggle their melanin production.
Unfortunately, there would probably be lots of people talking about 'betraying your heritage' or some other such nonsense.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635022</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635722</id>
	<title>If anything is "morally wrong" here...</title>
	<author>John Hasler</author>
	<datestamp>1269616320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...it is to even ask such a question.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...it is to even ask such a question .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...it is to even ask such a question.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31636204</id>
	<title>as long as its voluntary</title>
	<author>DeadRat4life</author>
	<datestamp>1269619800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>i mean, there are certain jobs you cant do being color blind, not to mention its just helpful to see a broader spectrum of colors. Its not like (cosmetic) plastic surgery where you just want to look younger or closer to societies, rather fucked up unrealistic, standard of beauty. That is trying to "normalize" and that is morally wrong. Helping people see more colors is helping people see more colors. We do have a problem with the loss and persecution of individuality (whether its a lifestyle choice or something from birth that makes one unique), but this is not the issue to start a discussion about it over.</htmltext>
<tokenext>i mean , there are certain jobs you cant do being color blind , not to mention its just helpful to see a broader spectrum of colors .
Its not like ( cosmetic ) plastic surgery where you just want to look younger or closer to societies , rather fucked up unrealistic , standard of beauty .
That is trying to " normalize " and that is morally wrong .
Helping people see more colors is helping people see more colors .
We do have a problem with the loss and persecution of individuality ( whether its a lifestyle choice or something from birth that makes one unique ) , but this is not the issue to start a discussion about it over .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>i mean, there are certain jobs you cant do being color blind, not to mention its just helpful to see a broader spectrum of colors.
Its not like (cosmetic) plastic surgery where you just want to look younger or closer to societies, rather fucked up unrealistic, standard of beauty.
That is trying to "normalize" and that is morally wrong.
Helping people see more colors is helping people see more colors.
We do have a problem with the loss and persecution of individuality (whether its a lifestyle choice or something from birth that makes one unique), but this is not the issue to start a discussion about it over.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31636366</id>
	<title>Re:As a colorblind man</title>
	<author>the\_raptor</author>
	<datestamp>1269620940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No the moral argument is from some of these "defectives" that don't feel they are "defective", and in fact don't want to be "like everybody else". This line of thought is quite strong in segments of the autistic, and congenitally blind or deaf communities.</p><p>Ultimately this kind of treatment will be performed in utero and so autistic's or congenitally deaf people may cease to be born. To these people that is like saying "we are going to fix racial discrimination by changing all black babies into white babies".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No the moral argument is from some of these " defectives " that do n't feel they are " defective " , and in fact do n't want to be " like everybody else " .
This line of thought is quite strong in segments of the autistic , and congenitally blind or deaf communities.Ultimately this kind of treatment will be performed in utero and so autistic 's or congenitally deaf people may cease to be born .
To these people that is like saying " we are going to fix racial discrimination by changing all black babies into white babies " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No the moral argument is from some of these "defectives" that don't feel they are "defective", and in fact don't want to be "like everybody else".
This line of thought is quite strong in segments of the autistic, and congenitally blind or deaf communities.Ultimately this kind of treatment will be performed in utero and so autistic's or congenitally deaf people may cease to be born.
To these people that is like saying "we are going to fix racial discrimination by changing all black babies into white babies".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635134</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31645184</id>
	<title>Re:silly question</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269712440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>How about restoring hearing to a deaf person (or simply the ability to hear about 20KHz again)?</p></div><p>Let's start simple: find a cure for tinnitus.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)</p><p>You know the sound of a flyback transformer on old TVs? I hear that same damn sound <b>everywhere</b>.</p><p>Sadly, I don't know what silence sounds like, because the ringing noise is perceptually 100x louder inside of a soundproof booth.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>How about restoring hearing to a deaf person ( or simply the ability to hear about 20KHz again ) ? Let 's start simple : find a cure for tinnitus .
: - ) You know the sound of a flyback transformer on old TVs ?
I hear that same damn sound everywhere.Sadly , I do n't know what silence sounds like , because the ringing noise is perceptually 100x louder inside of a soundproof booth .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How about restoring hearing to a deaf person (or simply the ability to hear about 20KHz again)?Let's start simple: find a cure for tinnitus.
:-)You know the sound of a flyback transformer on old TVs?
I hear that same damn sound everywhere.Sadly, I don't know what silence sounds like, because the ringing noise is perceptually 100x louder inside of a soundproof booth.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635234</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31638498</id>
	<title>Re:Oh give me a BREAK!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269694320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Evolution on that scale is irrelevant now. If telepathy is possible, we'll have discovered it and designed a gene for it and started virus-implanting it en masse, a very long time before it would be evolved by the colour blind population. Assuming we survive that long as a species. And that's a very paternalist argument anyway.</p><p>If there was a genetic condition which extended lifespan to 200 years, made suicide psychologically impossible, and caused absolutely off-the-scale excruciating pain for every hour of every day for the entirety of that 200 year life, would you object to a cure because the damned might evolve 200 year lifespans without the pain? I doubt it. So it's just a case of where you draw the line. I happen to draw it at the afflicted person's informed choice.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Evolution on that scale is irrelevant now .
If telepathy is possible , we 'll have discovered it and designed a gene for it and started virus-implanting it en masse , a very long time before it would be evolved by the colour blind population .
Assuming we survive that long as a species .
And that 's a very paternalist argument anyway.If there was a genetic condition which extended lifespan to 200 years , made suicide psychologically impossible , and caused absolutely off-the-scale excruciating pain for every hour of every day for the entirety of that 200 year life , would you object to a cure because the damned might evolve 200 year lifespans without the pain ?
I doubt it .
So it 's just a case of where you draw the line .
I happen to draw it at the afflicted person 's informed choice .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Evolution on that scale is irrelevant now.
If telepathy is possible, we'll have discovered it and designed a gene for it and started virus-implanting it en masse, a very long time before it would be evolved by the colour blind population.
Assuming we survive that long as a species.
And that's a very paternalist argument anyway.If there was a genetic condition which extended lifespan to 200 years, made suicide psychologically impossible, and caused absolutely off-the-scale excruciating pain for every hour of every day for the entirety of that 200 year life, would you object to a cure because the damned might evolve 200 year lifespans without the pain?
I doubt it.
So it's just a case of where you draw the line.
I happen to draw it at the afflicted person's informed choice.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635838</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31639286</id>
	<title>It's a very good question</title>
	<author>Coppit</author>
	<datestamp>1269703740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A few thoughts...</p><p>First, I'm colorblind. I'd say it impacts me maybe 1\% of my life. Graphs at work must use primary colors. Earlier in life I had the damnedest time with resistor markings. Even now when I crimp CAT5 cable I have someone double-check the colors. For a lot of colorblind people, they can detect the colors, it's just really hard and they have to stare and concentrate. Of course total colorblindness (no color at all) is a different, more rarer condition.</p><p>What I wanted to point out though is that earlier in the thread someone got chastised for asking what people would think about a "cure" for gayness if it turned out to be due to a genetic difference. The reason that's a good question is that, unlike colorblindness, it brings into the picture concepts of self-identity and culture. AFAIK no one identifies strongly as being colorblind, or considers themselves part of the "colorblind community".</p><p>We ran into this exact problem with my son, who has the Connexin 26 mutation, making him profoundly deaf. We were faced with a choice regarding the "cure" of cochlear implants. The deaf community is strongly against them, in large part because they see the coming demise of sign language and their culture (IMHO). They would go so far as to use disingenuous arguments like "let the child decide when they are 18"--way after the period of language acquisition. In the end we decided that being deaf wasn't "normal" despite what the deaf community said. Was that elitism or practicality? Being deaf has a much bigger impact on one's life than being colorblind.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A few thoughts...First , I 'm colorblind .
I 'd say it impacts me maybe 1 \ % of my life .
Graphs at work must use primary colors .
Earlier in life I had the damnedest time with resistor markings .
Even now when I crimp CAT5 cable I have someone double-check the colors .
For a lot of colorblind people , they can detect the colors , it 's just really hard and they have to stare and concentrate .
Of course total colorblindness ( no color at all ) is a different , more rarer condition.What I wanted to point out though is that earlier in the thread someone got chastised for asking what people would think about a " cure " for gayness if it turned out to be due to a genetic difference .
The reason that 's a good question is that , unlike colorblindness , it brings into the picture concepts of self-identity and culture .
AFAIK no one identifies strongly as being colorblind , or considers themselves part of the " colorblind community " .We ran into this exact problem with my son , who has the Connexin 26 mutation , making him profoundly deaf .
We were faced with a choice regarding the " cure " of cochlear implants .
The deaf community is strongly against them , in large part because they see the coming demise of sign language and their culture ( IMHO ) .
They would go so far as to use disingenuous arguments like " let the child decide when they are 18 " --way after the period of language acquisition .
In the end we decided that being deaf was n't " normal " despite what the deaf community said .
Was that elitism or practicality ?
Being deaf has a much bigger impact on one 's life than being colorblind .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A few thoughts...First, I'm colorblind.
I'd say it impacts me maybe 1\% of my life.
Graphs at work must use primary colors.
Earlier in life I had the damnedest time with resistor markings.
Even now when I crimp CAT5 cable I have someone double-check the colors.
For a lot of colorblind people, they can detect the colors, it's just really hard and they have to stare and concentrate.
Of course total colorblindness (no color at all) is a different, more rarer condition.What I wanted to point out though is that earlier in the thread someone got chastised for asking what people would think about a "cure" for gayness if it turned out to be due to a genetic difference.
The reason that's a good question is that, unlike colorblindness, it brings into the picture concepts of self-identity and culture.
AFAIK no one identifies strongly as being colorblind, or considers themselves part of the "colorblind community".We ran into this exact problem with my son, who has the Connexin 26 mutation, making him profoundly deaf.
We were faced with a choice regarding the "cure" of cochlear implants.
The deaf community is strongly against them, in large part because they see the coming demise of sign language and their culture (IMHO).
They would go so far as to use disingenuous arguments like "let the child decide when they are 18"--way after the period of language acquisition.
In the end we decided that being deaf wasn't "normal" despite what the deaf community said.
Was that elitism or practicality?
Being deaf has a much bigger impact on one's life than being colorblind.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635018</id>
	<title>not wrong</title>
	<author>parallel\_prankster</author>
	<datestamp>1269612420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>It can't be wrong if we are fixing an inability to process particular wavelengths of light.There are definitely other things that we could do when we mess with bio-engineering<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/genetics  etc that could raise moral and ethical issues . Now, using DNA to provide someone the ability to hear like a dog etc etc, that is more serious stuff ofcourse or maybe not.
Maybe it is moral that if we have technology that can improve our senses, it is ok to improve it even if we humans were not gifted with it at birth. I dont believe Nature is perfect.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It ca n't be wrong if we are fixing an inability to process particular wavelengths of light.There are definitely other things that we could do when we mess with bio-engineering /genetics etc that could raise moral and ethical issues .
Now , using DNA to provide someone the ability to hear like a dog etc etc , that is more serious stuff ofcourse or maybe not .
Maybe it is moral that if we have technology that can improve our senses , it is ok to improve it even if we humans were not gifted with it at birth .
I dont believe Nature is perfect .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It can't be wrong if we are fixing an inability to process particular wavelengths of light.There are definitely other things that we could do when we mess with bio-engineering /genetics  etc that could raise moral and ethical issues .
Now, using DNA to provide someone the ability to hear like a dog etc etc, that is more serious stuff ofcourse or maybe not.
Maybe it is moral that if we have technology that can improve our senses, it is ok to improve it even if we humans were not gifted with it at birth.
I dont believe Nature is perfect.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31636404</id>
	<title>Re:What the... I don't even...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269621120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Some cancers. Some are self inflicted (e.g. Smoking, alchaol abuse, Any number of items whos use or exposure to california thinks can cause canser (automobile exaust, diesel exaust, etc.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Some cancers .
Some are self inflicted ( e.g .
Smoking , alchaol abuse , Any number of items whos use or exposure to california thinks can cause canser ( automobile exaust , diesel exaust , etc .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Some cancers.
Some are self inflicted (e.g.
Smoking, alchaol abuse, Any number of items whos use or exposure to california thinks can cause canser (automobile exaust, diesel exaust, etc.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31634942</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31634942</id>
	<title>What the... I don't even...</title>
	<author>epp\_b</author>
	<datestamp>1269611940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>What kind of stupid, half-witted, pseudo-concern is this?  This is the same as asking if a cure for cancer is morally wrong; after all, it, too, is [ultimately] due to faulty genetics.</htmltext>
<tokenext>What kind of stupid , half-witted , pseudo-concern is this ?
This is the same as asking if a cure for cancer is morally wrong ; after all , it , too , is [ ultimately ] due to faulty genetics .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What kind of stupid, half-witted, pseudo-concern is this?
This is the same as asking if a cure for cancer is morally wrong; after all, it, too, is [ultimately] due to faulty genetics.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635496</id>
	<title>Er-duh.</title>
	<author>Sitnalta</author>
	<datestamp>1269615120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No. No it isn't. You'd have to be a fucking idiot not to want to be cured of colorblindness.</p><p>Ask this question again when a cure for homosexuality is found.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No .
No it is n't .
You 'd have to be a fucking idiot not to want to be cured of colorblindness.Ask this question again when a cure for homosexuality is found .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No.
No it isn't.
You'd have to be a fucking idiot not to want to be cured of colorblindness.Ask this question again when a cure for homosexuality is found.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635518</id>
	<title>Re:The Qualia beast raises its head again</title>
	<author>TheRaven64</author>
	<datestamp>1269615180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>No, it doesn't mean "probably", it means they can actually only see one color.</p></div><p>No, it means that they can probably only see one colour.  You see different shades of one colour as different shades, but you can take an image that is sampled as a single colour channel and, map it into a different colour space, getting a multi-coloured image.  The colours could represent different intensities, rather than different frequencies, or (given the signals sent down an optic nerve) you might see different colours at sharp intensity boundaries.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Just lower the lights until your night vision kicks in. Voila, you have monochromatic vision too.</p></div><p>Which doesn't necessarily tell you anything about how an animal that didn't evolve colour vision perceives similar signals.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>No , it does n't mean " probably " , it means they can actually only see one color.No , it means that they can probably only see one colour .
You see different shades of one colour as different shades , but you can take an image that is sampled as a single colour channel and , map it into a different colour space , getting a multi-coloured image .
The colours could represent different intensities , rather than different frequencies , or ( given the signals sent down an optic nerve ) you might see different colours at sharp intensity boundaries.Just lower the lights until your night vision kicks in .
Voila , you have monochromatic vision too.Which does n't necessarily tell you anything about how an animal that did n't evolve colour vision perceives similar signals .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, it doesn't mean "probably", it means they can actually only see one color.No, it means that they can probably only see one colour.
You see different shades of one colour as different shades, but you can take an image that is sampled as a single colour channel and, map it into a different colour space, getting a multi-coloured image.
The colours could represent different intensities, rather than different frequencies, or (given the signals sent down an optic nerve) you might see different colours at sharp intensity boundaries.Just lower the lights until your night vision kicks in.
Voila, you have monochromatic vision too.Which doesn't necessarily tell you anything about how an animal that didn't evolve colour vision perceives similar signals.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635144</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31636304</id>
	<title>OMFG</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269620520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>is it morally wrong to cure cancer?</p><p>TROLL</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>is it morally wrong to cure cancer ? TROLL</tokentext>
<sentencetext>is it morally wrong to cure cancer?TROLL</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635832</id>
	<title>NAACbP</title>
	<author>Clayperion</author>
	<datestamp>1269617040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Can't call it a disease...some organization will spring up (maybe the National Association for the Advancement of Colorblind People) and say that Red and Green M&amp;M's are misleading and we should only eat the gray ones.....wait aren't they all gray?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ca n't call it a disease...some organization will spring up ( maybe the National Association for the Advancement of Colorblind People ) and say that Red and Green M&amp;M 's are misleading and we should only eat the gray ones.....wait are n't they all gray ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can't call it a disease...some organization will spring up (maybe the National Association for the Advancement of Colorblind People) and say that Red and Green M&amp;M's are misleading and we should only eat the gray ones.....wait aren't they all gray?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31653202</id>
	<title>this is just silly</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269796320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Applying the same rationalization to other medical problems is it morally wrong to give immunizations, blood transfusions, artificial limbs, false teeth, fillings, even band-aids?!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Applying the same rationalization to other medical problems is it morally wrong to give immunizations , blood transfusions , artificial limbs , false teeth , fillings , even band-aids ?
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Applying the same rationalization to other medical problems is it morally wrong to give immunizations, blood transfusions, artificial limbs, false teeth, fillings, even band-aids?
!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31634962</id>
	<title>Too much political correctness...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269612060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I mean... WHAT?</p><p>I have AIDS, and that makes me unique. I don't care if you have a cure, I want what makes me and my life different!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I mean... WHAT ? I have AIDS , and that makes me unique .
I do n't care if you have a cure , I want what makes me and my life different !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I mean... WHAT?I have AIDS, and that makes me unique.
I don't care if you have a cure, I want what makes me and my life different!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635856</id>
	<title>Re:as an extreme red-green colorblind person...</title>
	<author>drinkypoo</author>
	<datestamp>1269617400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>However, let the kid grow to be 18 years old and make up his/her own mind. The slippery slope is limited IMO to the designer baby issue.</p></div><p>Sooner or later, people <em>will</em> be picking and choosing traits for their children. Most people will choose whatever is fashionable that year. Some people will choose totally wacky shit. Eventually, society will pick a path and more or less stabilize. Frankly I think it is wrong to tell people that they can't gene-tamper their offspring, as wrong as telling people they can't get treatments with their own stem cells. Appraise them of the risks involved and turn them loose. Anything that doesn't harm others is acceptable. Almost nobody really views babies as humans anyway; most humans are subject to the whims and wills of their parent(s) until well <em>after</em> they reach physical maturity, let alone before they can walk.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>However , let the kid grow to be 18 years old and make up his/her own mind .
The slippery slope is limited IMO to the designer baby issue.Sooner or later , people will be picking and choosing traits for their children .
Most people will choose whatever is fashionable that year .
Some people will choose totally wacky shit .
Eventually , society will pick a path and more or less stabilize .
Frankly I think it is wrong to tell people that they ca n't gene-tamper their offspring , as wrong as telling people they ca n't get treatments with their own stem cells .
Appraise them of the risks involved and turn them loose .
Anything that does n't harm others is acceptable .
Almost nobody really views babies as humans anyway ; most humans are subject to the whims and wills of their parent ( s ) until well after they reach physical maturity , let alone before they can walk .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>However, let the kid grow to be 18 years old and make up his/her own mind.
The slippery slope is limited IMO to the designer baby issue.Sooner or later, people will be picking and choosing traits for their children.
Most people will choose whatever is fashionable that year.
Some people will choose totally wacky shit.
Eventually, society will pick a path and more or less stabilize.
Frankly I think it is wrong to tell people that they can't gene-tamper their offspring, as wrong as telling people they can't get treatments with their own stem cells.
Appraise them of the risks involved and turn them loose.
Anything that doesn't harm others is acceptable.
Almost nobody really views babies as humans anyway; most humans are subject to the whims and wills of their parent(s) until well after they reach physical maturity, let alone before they can walk.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635490</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31661874</id>
	<title>Re:No.</title>
	<author>Carnildo</author>
	<datestamp>1269855360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Now if they were researching gene therapy to make swarthy folks more acceptably white we might have something to complain about.</p></div></blockquote><p>But what if they were researching a way to make them more resistant to Vitamin D deficiency at high latitudes?</p><p>How much of the problem is in the phrasing, and how much is in the research itself?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Now if they were researching gene therapy to make swarthy folks more acceptably white we might have something to complain about.But what if they were researching a way to make them more resistant to Vitamin D deficiency at high latitudes ? How much of the problem is in the phrasing , and how much is in the research itself ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now if they were researching gene therapy to make swarthy folks more acceptably white we might have something to complain about.But what if they were researching a way to make them more resistant to Vitamin D deficiency at high latitudes?How much of the problem is in the phrasing, and how much is in the research itself?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635022</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31636470</id>
	<title>Re:The Qualia beast raises its head again</title>
	<author>Mr Otobor</author>
	<datestamp>1269621900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>But what colours (or saturation) they *map* to inside the brain is another matter. For example, some creatures are monochromats, which means they can probably only see one colour. But what that colour actually is, is anyone's guess.</p></div><p>Pfft, Arilvionn, obviously.  Silly humans.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>But what colours ( or saturation ) they * map * to inside the brain is another matter .
For example , some creatures are monochromats , which means they can probably only see one colour .
But what that colour actually is , is anyone 's guess.Pfft , Arilvionn , obviously .
Silly humans .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But what colours (or saturation) they *map* to inside the brain is another matter.
For example, some creatures are monochromats, which means they can probably only see one colour.
But what that colour actually is, is anyone's guess.Pfft, Arilvionn, obviously.
Silly humans.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31634968</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31643128</id>
	<title>We see different colours</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269688680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>There's a huge assumption in the phrase "colour blindness". Most languages call it Daltonism, after the discoverer, which makes sense because most of us <em>can</em> see colours, just not quite the same ones you do. For most of us blue and yellow are seen the same as an ISO standard human. Green is more interesting. I see several colours which I've had to learn to group together as "green", since they don't have much in common to me. Yellow-green is obvious, but I also see blue-green (not turquoise - different colour) and red-green. Those infernal bi-coloured LEDs show red-green. Blue-green is the colour of a "go" traffic light green in my country (UK) and in most countries I've visited. Twenty years ago I would still see the odd old red-green traffic "go" light, but they seem to have been replaced as a matter of policy. The difference between a blue-green "go" and a red "stop" is huge for me: no chance of confusion. An amber (I think it's called yellow in the USA) traffic light is much closer to red, and I have to use the position to distinguish them. <br>

Size of the colour patch also matters: I can distinguish finer gradations in colour if the patch is larger. Luminance differences also help. This is part of the reason why specific mains wiring colours in the UK (and I think the EU) were chosen: for most colour-blind people, there is no risk of confusion.<br>

Would I get it changed? Possibly, but it would be a risk trade-off like laser eye surgery for my myopia, with a much more restricted up-side. It would be useful for getting the right white balance for my photography, but not as much of an advantage for that as you might expect.<br>

Much more important, lower risk, and easier is to make sure that you use the right colours for user interfaces - road signs, software etc. - or provide some sort of word-around. Let me give an example: I have to prepare a weekly Powerpoint 2003 slide summarising the state of my projects. There are two places where I have to colour something red/amber/green. One is a cell in a table, and the other is a filled circle. Unfortunately there are different dialogs for editing these colours: one contains two rectangles - the first containing recently used colours, and the second a wider palette. The other dialog contains a hexagonal palette. It doesn't matter hugely exactly which amber or green I use, but I'd like it consistent across the slide. This two-dialog arrangement means that I can't use the position of a colour in a palette to get a consistent selection.<br>

Since come what may, you will always be dealing with people with uncorrected vision even if an upgrade is available, it's worth taking a few minutes to get this right when you are doing design work. It doesn't need to compromise the experience of anyone with standard sight, any more than a blue-green traffic light bothers them.</htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's a huge assumption in the phrase " colour blindness " .
Most languages call it Daltonism , after the discoverer , which makes sense because most of us can see colours , just not quite the same ones you do .
For most of us blue and yellow are seen the same as an ISO standard human .
Green is more interesting .
I see several colours which I 've had to learn to group together as " green " , since they do n't have much in common to me .
Yellow-green is obvious , but I also see blue-green ( not turquoise - different colour ) and red-green .
Those infernal bi-coloured LEDs show red-green .
Blue-green is the colour of a " go " traffic light green in my country ( UK ) and in most countries I 've visited .
Twenty years ago I would still see the odd old red-green traffic " go " light , but they seem to have been replaced as a matter of policy .
The difference between a blue-green " go " and a red " stop " is huge for me : no chance of confusion .
An amber ( I think it 's called yellow in the USA ) traffic light is much closer to red , and I have to use the position to distinguish them .
Size of the colour patch also matters : I can distinguish finer gradations in colour if the patch is larger .
Luminance differences also help .
This is part of the reason why specific mains wiring colours in the UK ( and I think the EU ) were chosen : for most colour-blind people , there is no risk of confusion .
Would I get it changed ?
Possibly , but it would be a risk trade-off like laser eye surgery for my myopia , with a much more restricted up-side .
It would be useful for getting the right white balance for my photography , but not as much of an advantage for that as you might expect .
Much more important , lower risk , and easier is to make sure that you use the right colours for user interfaces - road signs , software etc .
- or provide some sort of word-around .
Let me give an example : I have to prepare a weekly Powerpoint 2003 slide summarising the state of my projects .
There are two places where I have to colour something red/amber/green .
One is a cell in a table , and the other is a filled circle .
Unfortunately there are different dialogs for editing these colours : one contains two rectangles - the first containing recently used colours , and the second a wider palette .
The other dialog contains a hexagonal palette .
It does n't matter hugely exactly which amber or green I use , but I 'd like it consistent across the slide .
This two-dialog arrangement means that I ca n't use the position of a colour in a palette to get a consistent selection .
Since come what may , you will always be dealing with people with uncorrected vision even if an upgrade is available , it 's worth taking a few minutes to get this right when you are doing design work .
It does n't need to compromise the experience of anyone with standard sight , any more than a blue-green traffic light bothers them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's a huge assumption in the phrase "colour blindness".
Most languages call it Daltonism, after the discoverer, which makes sense because most of us can see colours, just not quite the same ones you do.
For most of us blue and yellow are seen the same as an ISO standard human.
Green is more interesting.
I see several colours which I've had to learn to group together as "green", since they don't have much in common to me.
Yellow-green is obvious, but I also see blue-green (not turquoise - different colour) and red-green.
Those infernal bi-coloured LEDs show red-green.
Blue-green is the colour of a "go" traffic light green in my country (UK) and in most countries I've visited.
Twenty years ago I would still see the odd old red-green traffic "go" light, but they seem to have been replaced as a matter of policy.
The difference between a blue-green "go" and a red "stop" is huge for me: no chance of confusion.
An amber (I think it's called yellow in the USA) traffic light is much closer to red, and I have to use the position to distinguish them.
Size of the colour patch also matters: I can distinguish finer gradations in colour if the patch is larger.
Luminance differences also help.
This is part of the reason why specific mains wiring colours in the UK (and I think the EU) were chosen: for most colour-blind people, there is no risk of confusion.
Would I get it changed?
Possibly, but it would be a risk trade-off like laser eye surgery for my myopia, with a much more restricted up-side.
It would be useful for getting the right white balance for my photography, but not as much of an advantage for that as you might expect.
Much more important, lower risk, and easier is to make sure that you use the right colours for user interfaces - road signs, software etc.
- or provide some sort of word-around.
Let me give an example: I have to prepare a weekly Powerpoint 2003 slide summarising the state of my projects.
There are two places where I have to colour something red/amber/green.
One is a cell in a table, and the other is a filled circle.
Unfortunately there are different dialogs for editing these colours: one contains two rectangles - the first containing recently used colours, and the second a wider palette.
The other dialog contains a hexagonal palette.
It doesn't matter hugely exactly which amber or green I use, but I'd like it consistent across the slide.
This two-dialog arrangement means that I can't use the position of a colour in a palette to get a consistent selection.
Since come what may, you will always be dealing with people with uncorrected vision even if an upgrade is available, it's worth taking a few minutes to get this right when you are doing design work.
It doesn't need to compromise the experience of anyone with standard sight, any more than a blue-green traffic light bothers them.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31642414</id>
	<title>Morality still voodoo science</title>
	<author>jwbales</author>
	<datestamp>1269682740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The fact that anyone would even ask whether or not it would be moral to cure color blindness is a symptom of the fact that morality is still considered to be outside the realm of reason, that there is no way to get from an 'is' to an 'ought'.</p><p>Ayn Rand pretty much blew that notion out of the water when she identified the purpose and nature of morality in her essay "The Objectivist Ethics" in her book "The Virtue of Selfishness."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The fact that anyone would even ask whether or not it would be moral to cure color blindness is a symptom of the fact that morality is still considered to be outside the realm of reason , that there is no way to get from an 'is ' to an 'ought'.Ayn Rand pretty much blew that notion out of the water when she identified the purpose and nature of morality in her essay " The Objectivist Ethics " in her book " The Virtue of Selfishness .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The fact that anyone would even ask whether or not it would be moral to cure color blindness is a symptom of the fact that morality is still considered to be outside the realm of reason, that there is no way to get from an 'is' to an 'ought'.Ayn Rand pretty much blew that notion out of the water when she identified the purpose and nature of morality in her essay "The Objectivist Ethics" in her book "The Virtue of Selfishness.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31636586</id>
	<title>save me</title>
	<author>sacrilicious</author>
	<datestamp>1269623100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>'Are we trying to 'normalize' humans to a threshold of experience?'</p></div></blockquote><p>

Is it morally wrong to install toilets?  Are we just trying to 'normalize' humans to a common experience of not dying of dysentery?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>'Are we trying to 'normalize ' humans to a threshold of experience ?
' Is it morally wrong to install toilets ?
Are we just trying to 'normalize ' humans to a common experience of not dying of dysentery ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>'Are we trying to 'normalize' humans to a threshold of experience?
'

Is it morally wrong to install toilets?
Are we just trying to 'normalize' humans to a common experience of not dying of dysentery?
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31637374</id>
	<title>Re:No.</title>
	<author>Khashishi</author>
	<datestamp>1269632400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>so, if they could've cured Michael Jackson of his whiteness would that be ok?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>so , if they could 've cured Michael Jackson of his whiteness would that be ok ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>so, if they could've cured Michael Jackson of his whiteness would that be ok?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635022</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31636928</id>
	<title>Friend's Story</title>
	<author>VanHalensing</author>
	<datestamp>1269625800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well, I'd say let the person decide.

I had a friend who was offered a full ride to the Air Force Academy, and they were going to train him to be a fighter pilot, which is what he had always wanted to be.. All of this was contingent on a physical and psychological exam. He had both, he aced both... except for being colorblind. They ended up completely taking the offer away because of it. He would have said yes to this procedure, it was his dream. I'd say if the person doesn't want/need it, they shouldn't get it. If the do, then don't deny them. Maybe put an age limit on it, like Lasic and all of those procedures.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , I 'd say let the person decide .
I had a friend who was offered a full ride to the Air Force Academy , and they were going to train him to be a fighter pilot , which is what he had always wanted to be.. All of this was contingent on a physical and psychological exam .
He had both , he aced both... except for being colorblind .
They ended up completely taking the offer away because of it .
He would have said yes to this procedure , it was his dream .
I 'd say if the person does n't want/need it , they should n't get it .
If the do , then do n't deny them .
Maybe put an age limit on it , like Lasic and all of those procedures .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, I'd say let the person decide.
I had a friend who was offered a full ride to the Air Force Academy, and they were going to train him to be a fighter pilot, which is what he had always wanted to be.. All of this was contingent on a physical and psychological exam.
He had both, he aced both... except for being colorblind.
They ended up completely taking the offer away because of it.
He would have said yes to this procedure, it was his dream.
I'd say if the person doesn't want/need it, they shouldn't get it.
If the do, then don't deny them.
Maybe put an age limit on it, like Lasic and all of those procedures.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635022</id>
	<title>No.</title>
	<author>Zadaz</author>
	<datestamp>1269612420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No.  It's not "normalization".  Being able to differentiate between colors is incredibly valuable.</p><p>Now if they were researching gene therapy to make swarthy folks more acceptably white we might have something to complain about.</p><p>In a related note: If I could get gene therapy to let me see further into the UV and IR ranges I'd totally go for it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No .
It 's not " normalization " .
Being able to differentiate between colors is incredibly valuable.Now if they were researching gene therapy to make swarthy folks more acceptably white we might have something to complain about.In a related note : If I could get gene therapy to let me see further into the UV and IR ranges I 'd totally go for it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No.
It's not "normalization".
Being able to differentiate between colors is incredibly valuable.Now if they were researching gene therapy to make swarthy folks more acceptably white we might have something to complain about.In a related note: If I could get gene therapy to let me see further into the UV and IR ranges I'd totally go for it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635708</id>
	<title>Re:as an extreme red-green colorblind person...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269616260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I say "fuck you" to your moral objection.  Color blindness is a disability.  It may not be anywhere near as serious as being handicapped, missing  an appendage, or say, a whole eye, but it does cause problems nonetheless.</p></div><p>AMEN!!! I'd get the "cure" in a minute.</p><p>I lost my very first job I got after graduating from college in 1964 (assembling wiring harnesses) because I was color blind.</p><p>I was disqualified from being a Navy pilot because I was color blind.</p><p>I was disqualified from any Navy jobs that had to do with electronics because I was color blind.</p><p>I was disqualified from a Navy photo-interpretation job because I was color blind.</p><p>After I got out of the Navy, I lied about my color vision to get a job repairing mainframe computers. I was able to find work-arounds, but it required very careful troubleshooting and repair techniques. Each time I changed jobs, I had to start all over again until I finally moved on to jobs that didn't require accurate color vision.</p><p>So is it a disability - absolutely.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I say " fuck you " to your moral objection .
Color blindness is a disability .
It may not be anywhere near as serious as being handicapped , missing an appendage , or say , a whole eye , but it does cause problems nonetheless.AMEN ! ! !
I 'd get the " cure " in a minute.I lost my very first job I got after graduating from college in 1964 ( assembling wiring harnesses ) because I was color blind.I was disqualified from being a Navy pilot because I was color blind.I was disqualified from any Navy jobs that had to do with electronics because I was color blind.I was disqualified from a Navy photo-interpretation job because I was color blind.After I got out of the Navy , I lied about my color vision to get a job repairing mainframe computers .
I was able to find work-arounds , but it required very careful troubleshooting and repair techniques .
Each time I changed jobs , I had to start all over again until I finally moved on to jobs that did n't require accurate color vision.So is it a disability - absolutely .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I say "fuck you" to your moral objection.
Color blindness is a disability.
It may not be anywhere near as serious as being handicapped, missing  an appendage, or say, a whole eye, but it does cause problems nonetheless.AMEN!!!
I'd get the "cure" in a minute.I lost my very first job I got after graduating from college in 1964 (assembling wiring harnesses) because I was color blind.I was disqualified from being a Navy pilot because I was color blind.I was disqualified from any Navy jobs that had to do with electronics because I was color blind.I was disqualified from a Navy photo-interpretation job because I was color blind.After I got out of the Navy, I lied about my color vision to get a job repairing mainframe computers.
I was able to find work-arounds, but it required very careful troubleshooting and repair techniques.
Each time I changed jobs, I had to start all over again until I finally moved on to jobs that didn't require accurate color vision.So is it a disability - absolutely.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635070</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31637466</id>
	<title>Simple Answer</title>
	<author>hyades1</author>
	<datestamp>1269720480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> There seem to be some advantages to colour blindness.  Apparently people who are completely colour blind (almost exclusively men, and very rare) can pick forms out of distracting foreground/background patterns better than people with normal vision.  They also seem to enjoy an advantage in night vision.  Presumably people with red/green colour blindness (the common form) also enjoy some advantages over people with normal vision under some circumstances. </p><p> Knowing these facts, it seems overwhelmingly obvious that curing the problem is the way to go...and the cure would very likely include the possibility of restoring the condition or creating it, should the need arise. </p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There seem to be some advantages to colour blindness .
Apparently people who are completely colour blind ( almost exclusively men , and very rare ) can pick forms out of distracting foreground/background patterns better than people with normal vision .
They also seem to enjoy an advantage in night vision .
Presumably people with red/green colour blindness ( the common form ) also enjoy some advantages over people with normal vision under some circumstances .
Knowing these facts , it seems overwhelmingly obvious that curing the problem is the way to go...and the cure would very likely include the possibility of restoring the condition or creating it , should the need arise .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> There seem to be some advantages to colour blindness.
Apparently people who are completely colour blind (almost exclusively men, and very rare) can pick forms out of distracting foreground/background patterns better than people with normal vision.
They also seem to enjoy an advantage in night vision.
Presumably people with red/green colour blindness (the common form) also enjoy some advantages over people with normal vision under some circumstances.
Knowing these facts, it seems overwhelmingly obvious that curing the problem is the way to go...and the cure would very likely include the possibility of restoring the condition or creating it, should the need arise. </sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635638</id>
	<title>Re:I think I'll pass on this.</title>
	<author>GaryOlson</author>
	<datestamp>1269615840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have the same color blindness; and I don't see it as a defect. When inspecting a collection of machined parts, I could unerringly spot the defective parts visually. The defects were as small as<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.0015". I attribute this acuity to not being distracted by colors I can't see. My ability to discern form in greyscale is also much higher than almost everyone else I know. But don't ask me to look for numbers in the dots.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have the same color blindness ; and I do n't see it as a defect .
When inspecting a collection of machined parts , I could unerringly spot the defective parts visually .
The defects were as small as .0015 " .
I attribute this acuity to not being distracted by colors I ca n't see .
My ability to discern form in greyscale is also much higher than almost everyone else I know .
But do n't ask me to look for numbers in the dots .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have the same color blindness; and I don't see it as a defect.
When inspecting a collection of machined parts, I could unerringly spot the defective parts visually.
The defects were as small as .0015".
I attribute this acuity to not being distracted by colors I can't see.
My ability to discern form in greyscale is also much higher than almost everyone else I know.
But don't ask me to look for numbers in the dots.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31634940</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31662468</id>
	<title>another question to answer</title>
	<author>DRACO-</author>
	<datestamp>1269857940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you really want to ask, is putting plastic covers over outlets for safety of our children morally wrong?  Is all the safety training and safety equipment morally wrong?  Without the advances of safety we would have millions of people dying and darwinism would actually be working in the human race.  Humanity would actually be able to evolve to our next level except because of our intelectual abilities, we have staved off our next level of evolution.</p><p>Change the question, is curing cancer morally wrong?  Curing color blindness wont change much.  Those who are color blind know not to go into bomb diffusion jobs or other color coded problem jobs.  Evolutionary wise those who are color blind are not getting themseleves killed or dying out of the human gene pool and instead are passing on the 'damaged' gene set.</p><p>Question now is, do we now chose our evolutionary paths now?</p><p>Yes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you really want to ask , is putting plastic covers over outlets for safety of our children morally wrong ?
Is all the safety training and safety equipment morally wrong ?
Without the advances of safety we would have millions of people dying and darwinism would actually be working in the human race .
Humanity would actually be able to evolve to our next level except because of our intelectual abilities , we have staved off our next level of evolution.Change the question , is curing cancer morally wrong ?
Curing color blindness wont change much .
Those who are color blind know not to go into bomb diffusion jobs or other color coded problem jobs .
Evolutionary wise those who are color blind are not getting themseleves killed or dying out of the human gene pool and instead are passing on the 'damaged ' gene set.Question now is , do we now chose our evolutionary paths now ? Yes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you really want to ask, is putting plastic covers over outlets for safety of our children morally wrong?
Is all the safety training and safety equipment morally wrong?
Without the advances of safety we would have millions of people dying and darwinism would actually be working in the human race.
Humanity would actually be able to evolve to our next level except because of our intelectual abilities, we have staved off our next level of evolution.Change the question, is curing cancer morally wrong?
Curing color blindness wont change much.
Those who are color blind know not to go into bomb diffusion jobs or other color coded problem jobs.
Evolutionary wise those who are color blind are not getting themseleves killed or dying out of the human gene pool and instead are passing on the 'damaged' gene set.Question now is, do we now chose our evolutionary paths now?Yes.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31636016</id>
	<title>Re:What the... I don't even...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269618480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's a serious problem. Sure, we could just ask and forget the ethical dilemma, but what if we're eliminating different ways of looking at things that could lead to all sorts of interesting ways of dealing with problems? The same can be said for the deaf or the autistic.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's a serious problem .
Sure , we could just ask and forget the ethical dilemma , but what if we 're eliminating different ways of looking at things that could lead to all sorts of interesting ways of dealing with problems ?
The same can be said for the deaf or the autistic .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's a serious problem.
Sure, we could just ask and forget the ethical dilemma, but what if we're eliminating different ways of looking at things that could lead to all sorts of interesting ways of dealing with problems?
The same can be said for the deaf or the autistic.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31634942</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31638440</id>
	<title>Uhhh, why not</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269693480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm colour-blind and of course I'd like to see more, there's nothing to lose and a little to gain.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm colour-blind and of course I 'd like to see more , there 's nothing to lose and a little to gain .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm colour-blind and of course I'd like to see more, there's nothing to lose and a little to gain.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31636922</id>
	<title>Re:What the... I don't even...</title>
	<author>Prof.Phreak</author>
	<datestamp>1269625740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>well, a ton of folks aren't even aware they're colorblind (I didn't learn until a few years ago when I went for a pilot's medical---apparently I can't fly at night). With cancer, there's a huge down side... with color-blindness, most folks can live their whole live and besides for (allegedly) mismatched clothing colors, never realize anything is wrong.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>well , a ton of folks are n't even aware they 're colorblind ( I did n't learn until a few years ago when I went for a pilot 's medical---apparently I ca n't fly at night ) .
With cancer , there 's a huge down side... with color-blindness , most folks can live their whole live and besides for ( allegedly ) mismatched clothing colors , never realize anything is wrong .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>well, a ton of folks aren't even aware they're colorblind (I didn't learn until a few years ago when I went for a pilot's medical---apparently I can't fly at night).
With cancer, there's a huge down side... with color-blindness, most folks can live their whole live and besides for (allegedly) mismatched clothing colors, never realize anything is wrong.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31634942</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635902</id>
	<title>A completly different viewpoint</title>
	<author>Mystify432</author>
	<datestamp>1269617580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>On the other hand, I could argue that it is more morally justifiable to genetically modify a person to fix flaws than other methods we currently employ.
Take glasses as an example. Poor eyesight is a severe disadvantage that is all but negated by the simple application of eyeglasses. By doing this we are circumventing natural selection, and what is a trait that would normally be weighed down is allowed to propagate almost equally, and become widespread, polluting the gene pool. This leads to  genetic degradation as a race.
However, if you genetically alter someone to remove a flaw, this is passed on to children and the flaw is removed, resulting in a stronger gene pool. Why should being counterproductive with natural selection be morally right and being truly beneficial be morally wrong?</htmltext>
<tokenext>On the other hand , I could argue that it is more morally justifiable to genetically modify a person to fix flaws than other methods we currently employ .
Take glasses as an example .
Poor eyesight is a severe disadvantage that is all but negated by the simple application of eyeglasses .
By doing this we are circumventing natural selection , and what is a trait that would normally be weighed down is allowed to propagate almost equally , and become widespread , polluting the gene pool .
This leads to genetic degradation as a race .
However , if you genetically alter someone to remove a flaw , this is passed on to children and the flaw is removed , resulting in a stronger gene pool .
Why should being counterproductive with natural selection be morally right and being truly beneficial be morally wrong ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>On the other hand, I could argue that it is more morally justifiable to genetically modify a person to fix flaws than other methods we currently employ.
Take glasses as an example.
Poor eyesight is a severe disadvantage that is all but negated by the simple application of eyeglasses.
By doing this we are circumventing natural selection, and what is a trait that would normally be weighed down is allowed to propagate almost equally, and become widespread, polluting the gene pool.
This leads to  genetic degradation as a race.
However, if you genetically alter someone to remove a flaw, this is passed on to children and the flaw is removed, resulting in a stronger gene pool.
Why should being counterproductive with natural selection be morally right and being truly beneficial be morally wrong?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635056</id>
	<title>Oh give me a BREAK!</title>
	<author>erroneus</author>
	<datestamp>1269612540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"normalize"?  We have a society and a world... forget that, we have poisonous foods and non-poisonous foods that can be differentiated by color.  There are poisonous snakes that are differentiated by color as well.  This isn't a "normalization" like gay or not-gay.  It's a disability that has managed to propagate for a long time.  I am glad not to be color blind.  I would hate the driving related problems of being color blind, not to mention the disqualifications in jobs that may be experienced along with many other things.</p><p>I recall some stuff about deaf people wanting to stay deaf.  Once again, it's just damned stupid.  I would want more senses, not fewer.  Perhaps these same deaf people are just wanting their sympathetic free ride through life to continue.  Who knows what the reason might be, but it is pretty clear in that I have yet to hear of any hearing person wanting to be deaf or anyone having lost their hearing not wanting it back.</p><p>I have never heard of anyone losing color sensitivity before, but if they did, I suspect the same would be the case as with deaf people.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" normalize " ?
We have a society and a world... forget that , we have poisonous foods and non-poisonous foods that can be differentiated by color .
There are poisonous snakes that are differentiated by color as well .
This is n't a " normalization " like gay or not-gay .
It 's a disability that has managed to propagate for a long time .
I am glad not to be color blind .
I would hate the driving related problems of being color blind , not to mention the disqualifications in jobs that may be experienced along with many other things.I recall some stuff about deaf people wanting to stay deaf .
Once again , it 's just damned stupid .
I would want more senses , not fewer .
Perhaps these same deaf people are just wanting their sympathetic free ride through life to continue .
Who knows what the reason might be , but it is pretty clear in that I have yet to hear of any hearing person wanting to be deaf or anyone having lost their hearing not wanting it back.I have never heard of anyone losing color sensitivity before , but if they did , I suspect the same would be the case as with deaf people .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"normalize"?
We have a society and a world... forget that, we have poisonous foods and non-poisonous foods that can be differentiated by color.
There are poisonous snakes that are differentiated by color as well.
This isn't a "normalization" like gay or not-gay.
It's a disability that has managed to propagate for a long time.
I am glad not to be color blind.
I would hate the driving related problems of being color blind, not to mention the disqualifications in jobs that may be experienced along with many other things.I recall some stuff about deaf people wanting to stay deaf.
Once again, it's just damned stupid.
I would want more senses, not fewer.
Perhaps these same deaf people are just wanting their sympathetic free ride through life to continue.
Who knows what the reason might be, but it is pretty clear in that I have yet to hear of any hearing person wanting to be deaf or anyone having lost their hearing not wanting it back.I have never heard of anyone losing color sensitivity before, but if they did, I suspect the same would be the case as with deaf people.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31637324</id>
	<title>Re:I think I'll pass on this.</title>
	<author>Pentium100</author>
	<datestamp>1269631020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr></p><div class="quote"><p>...like waking up one morning to learn that ketchup is really green.</p></div><p>I saw green ketchup in the store one time. I think Heinz makes it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>...like waking up one morning to learn that ketchup is really green.I saw green ketchup in the store one time .
I think Heinz makes it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> ...like waking up one morning to learn that ketchup is really green.I saw green ketchup in the store one time.
I think Heinz makes it.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31634940</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635532</id>
	<title>Re:Oh give me a BREAK!</title>
	<author>Artifakt</author>
	<datestamp>1269615300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Many people have vision that is good enough it could be corrected beyond 20/20. Just think of the advantages of being able to see from 20 feet away what most people now can see from only 15 or 10 feet away. In  practice, most people corrected this way as adults are uncomfortable with it. Many find the experience eerie or disturbing, and frequently, the persons this has been tested on develop symptoms such as headaches as they use their 'improved' vision. A substantial majority report the world looks seriously unpleasant in uniform sharp relief. Eye surgeons have become very reluctant to correct beyond average abilities until they at least test the patient for a few weeks with lenses because these reactions are so common, and sometimes opticians don't try to correct beyond 20/20 even for glasses.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Many people have vision that is good enough it could be corrected beyond 20/20 .
Just think of the advantages of being able to see from 20 feet away what most people now can see from only 15 or 10 feet away .
In practice , most people corrected this way as adults are uncomfortable with it .
Many find the experience eerie or disturbing , and frequently , the persons this has been tested on develop symptoms such as headaches as they use their 'improved ' vision .
A substantial majority report the world looks seriously unpleasant in uniform sharp relief .
Eye surgeons have become very reluctant to correct beyond average abilities until they at least test the patient for a few weeks with lenses because these reactions are so common , and sometimes opticians do n't try to correct beyond 20/20 even for glasses .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Many people have vision that is good enough it could be corrected beyond 20/20.
Just think of the advantages of being able to see from 20 feet away what most people now can see from only 15 or 10 feet away.
In  practice, most people corrected this way as adults are uncomfortable with it.
Many find the experience eerie or disturbing, and frequently, the persons this has been tested on develop symptoms such as headaches as they use their 'improved' vision.
A substantial majority report the world looks seriously unpleasant in uniform sharp relief.
Eye surgeons have become very reluctant to correct beyond average abilities until they at least test the patient for a few weeks with lenses because these reactions are so common, and sometimes opticians don't try to correct beyond 20/20 even for glasses.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635056</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635994</id>
	<title>Re:No.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269618360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Now if they were researching gene therapy to make swarthy folks more acceptably white we might have something to complain about.</p></div><p>Why? What is the difference between changing how someone perceives a color or changing the actual color?</p><p>Some people might see having lighter skin as "incredibly valuable", why do you feel you need to complain about either?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Now if they were researching gene therapy to make swarthy folks more acceptably white we might have something to complain about.Why ?
What is the difference between changing how someone perceives a color or changing the actual color ? Some people might see having lighter skin as " incredibly valuable " , why do you feel you need to complain about either ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now if they were researching gene therapy to make swarthy folks more acceptably white we might have something to complain about.Why?
What is the difference between changing how someone perceives a color or changing the actual color?Some people might see having lighter skin as "incredibly valuable", why do you feel you need to complain about either?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635022</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31637578</id>
	<title>Re:The Qualia beast raises its head again</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269722880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>the latter.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>the latter .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the latter.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31634968</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31637016</id>
	<title>Re:I think I'll pass on this.</title>
	<author>maxwells\_deamon</author>
	<datestamp>1269626640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When I was in 10th grade we collected pond water samples. the next day we took samples of the water and put them under a microscope.</p><p>I asked the teacher if I could have a slide with a slight well in it.  Because I was a nerd he loaned me one.</p><p>I prepared my slide and showed him what I had found.  There were a few fresh water hydra on the sides of the collection jars. They are tiny animals about 30 cells total. I could pick them off the walls with a pipette and put them on the slide.</p><p>He asked me how i found it.  I told him that I could see them and wanted to see it closer.  I do not think he belived me.</p><p>It wasn't till years later that I realized that they could not see it at all except perhaps as a dot.  I could see the arms with unaided eyes</p><p>I am severly nearsighted and Color Blind<br>
&nbsp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When I was in 10th grade we collected pond water samples .
the next day we took samples of the water and put them under a microscope.I asked the teacher if I could have a slide with a slight well in it .
Because I was a nerd he loaned me one.I prepared my slide and showed him what I had found .
There were a few fresh water hydra on the sides of the collection jars .
They are tiny animals about 30 cells total .
I could pick them off the walls with a pipette and put them on the slide.He asked me how i found it .
I told him that I could see them and wanted to see it closer .
I do not think he belived me.It was n't till years later that I realized that they could not see it at all except perhaps as a dot .
I could see the arms with unaided eyesI am severly nearsighted and Color Blind  </tokentext>
<sentencetext>When I was in 10th grade we collected pond water samples.
the next day we took samples of the water and put them under a microscope.I asked the teacher if I could have a slide with a slight well in it.
Because I was a nerd he loaned me one.I prepared my slide and showed him what I had found.
There were a few fresh water hydra on the sides of the collection jars.
They are tiny animals about 30 cells total.
I could pick them off the walls with a pipette and put them on the slide.He asked me how i found it.
I told him that I could see them and wanted to see it closer.
I do not think he belived me.It wasn't till years later that I realized that they could not see it at all except perhaps as a dot.
I could see the arms with unaided eyesI am severly nearsighted and Color Blind
 </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635638</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31637070</id>
	<title>Re:as an extreme red-green colorblind person...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269627240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I can't smell. If given the opportunity to give me a sense of smell I would also do it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I ca n't smell .
If given the opportunity to give me a sense of smell I would also do it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can't smell.
If given the opportunity to give me a sense of smell I would also do it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635070</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31643556</id>
	<title>Not so simple.  Is it a disease?</title>
	<author>Valdrax</author>
	<datestamp>1269693360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>No, of course it is not immoral to cure a disease.</p></div><p>Is color-blindness a disease which should be cured whenever possible or a valuable human trait that gives enhanced abilities in certain situations (such as in low-light or against certain camouflaged targets)?  If you don't assume that it's a disease, then is it acceptable to eliminate a trait from humanity simply because our society designs itself around the visual abilities of the majority?</p><p>And then where do you draw the line on what is a disease and should be eliminated at every turn and what is simply an acceptable different between people?  Color-blindness seems to cause far more disadvantages than advantages, but what about certain mental / personality traits, like mild Aspergers or transsexualism?  Who gets to decide what is a disease and what is a variation, and which way does society default when it's vague?  Do you let parents get to decide what kind of abilities and personality their children will have, and will it be worth it if a child decides not to purse the career their parent engineered them for?</p><p>(Personally, I'm in favor of allowing a cure for colorblindness -- even before birth -- but I'm not so arrogant to decide that it's a crazy thing to even think about objecting to or that people are reactionary lunatics for being upset by it.)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>No , of course it is not immoral to cure a disease.Is color-blindness a disease which should be cured whenever possible or a valuable human trait that gives enhanced abilities in certain situations ( such as in low-light or against certain camouflaged targets ) ?
If you do n't assume that it 's a disease , then is it acceptable to eliminate a trait from humanity simply because our society designs itself around the visual abilities of the majority ? And then where do you draw the line on what is a disease and should be eliminated at every turn and what is simply an acceptable different between people ?
Color-blindness seems to cause far more disadvantages than advantages , but what about certain mental / personality traits , like mild Aspergers or transsexualism ?
Who gets to decide what is a disease and what is a variation , and which way does society default when it 's vague ?
Do you let parents get to decide what kind of abilities and personality their children will have , and will it be worth it if a child decides not to purse the career their parent engineered them for ?
( Personally , I 'm in favor of allowing a cure for colorblindness -- even before birth -- but I 'm not so arrogant to decide that it 's a crazy thing to even think about objecting to or that people are reactionary lunatics for being upset by it .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, of course it is not immoral to cure a disease.Is color-blindness a disease which should be cured whenever possible or a valuable human trait that gives enhanced abilities in certain situations (such as in low-light or against certain camouflaged targets)?
If you don't assume that it's a disease, then is it acceptable to eliminate a trait from humanity simply because our society designs itself around the visual abilities of the majority?And then where do you draw the line on what is a disease and should be eliminated at every turn and what is simply an acceptable different between people?
Color-blindness seems to cause far more disadvantages than advantages, but what about certain mental / personality traits, like mild Aspergers or transsexualism?
Who gets to decide what is a disease and what is a variation, and which way does society default when it's vague?
Do you let parents get to decide what kind of abilities and personality their children will have, and will it be worth it if a child decides not to purse the career their parent engineered them for?
(Personally, I'm in favor of allowing a cure for colorblindness -- even before birth -- but I'm not so arrogant to decide that it's a crazy thing to even think about objecting to or that people are reactionary lunatics for being upset by it.
)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635956</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635088</id>
	<title>normalize this</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269612720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ok, so we don't want a "normalized" human experience.  The next step should be trying to augment the "average" capabilities of humans.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ok , so we do n't want a " normalized " human experience .
The next step should be trying to augment the " average " capabilities of humans .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ok, so we don't want a "normalized" human experience.
The next step should be trying to augment the "average" capabilities of humans.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635790</id>
	<title>Re:Oh give me a BREAK!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269616740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Aside from the truly ignorant and insulting reference to getting a "free ride", did you think that there might be other reasons - like deaf culture - that cause these people to turn down "cures" for their hearing loss?</p><p>Maybe they have a real concern that curing their deafness deprives them of the sensory acuity that they have developed as compensation. I worked with deaf individuals on a construction site (Galudette U. students doing Habitat for Humanity), and we did need to alter our safety proceedures, but it really opened me to the limitations of being fully hearing. These students were incredible at picking out physical details; they could feel the power saw going through the wood; they had incredible abilities to communicate effortlessly at a distance, even in large crowds. Really, it was incredible, and made me think that maybe I was the one whose sensory aparatus was flawed. Instead of assuming that the "normal" way is the right way, it might help to actually think about the consequences of curing things that aren't really a problem.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Aside from the truly ignorant and insulting reference to getting a " free ride " , did you think that there might be other reasons - like deaf culture - that cause these people to turn down " cures " for their hearing loss ? Maybe they have a real concern that curing their deafness deprives them of the sensory acuity that they have developed as compensation .
I worked with deaf individuals on a construction site ( Galudette U. students doing Habitat for Humanity ) , and we did need to alter our safety proceedures , but it really opened me to the limitations of being fully hearing .
These students were incredible at picking out physical details ; they could feel the power saw going through the wood ; they had incredible abilities to communicate effortlessly at a distance , even in large crowds .
Really , it was incredible , and made me think that maybe I was the one whose sensory aparatus was flawed .
Instead of assuming that the " normal " way is the right way , it might help to actually think about the consequences of curing things that are n't really a problem .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Aside from the truly ignorant and insulting reference to getting a "free ride", did you think that there might be other reasons - like deaf culture - that cause these people to turn down "cures" for their hearing loss?Maybe they have a real concern that curing their deafness deprives them of the sensory acuity that they have developed as compensation.
I worked with deaf individuals on a construction site (Galudette U. students doing Habitat for Humanity), and we did need to alter our safety proceedures, but it really opened me to the limitations of being fully hearing.
These students were incredible at picking out physical details; they could feel the power saw going through the wood; they had incredible abilities to communicate effortlessly at a distance, even in large crowds.
Really, it was incredible, and made me think that maybe I was the one whose sensory aparatus was flawed.
Instead of assuming that the "normal" way is the right way, it might help to actually think about the consequences of curing things that aren't really a problem.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635056</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31638652</id>
	<title>No, it is not morally wrong</title>
	<author>EmagGeek</author>
	<datestamp>1269696720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What is morally wrong is telling someone with a disease or defect that they are not allowed to pursue curing themselves. People should have sole dominion over their own bodies, and if someone who is colorblind wants to see colors, it is not within the rights of The State to tell them they can't.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What is morally wrong is telling someone with a disease or defect that they are not allowed to pursue curing themselves .
People should have sole dominion over their own bodies , and if someone who is colorblind wants to see colors , it is not within the rights of The State to tell them they ca n't .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What is morally wrong is telling someone with a disease or defect that they are not allowed to pursue curing themselves.
People should have sole dominion over their own bodies, and if someone who is colorblind wants to see colors, it is not within the rights of The State to tell them they can't.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635666</id>
	<title>Call me crazy but...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269615960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm actually curious how much these "sicknesses" play a role in our future evolution.  I'm no geneticist but I'm guessing that alot of these genetic transformations are mutations of some sort or another.  If this is the case could these mutations eventually change into something else?  I mean when the dinosaurs arms started getting smaller and smaller, eventually evolving into wings, etc. do you think somewhere, it might have appeared strange or different?  What about skin color, hair color, etc.?  Do you think that variations appeared strange at first, or even consider some defect or disease?  Could color-blindness or even blindness be some mutations that may after thousands of years lead to some variations in the species?  If so, what do you feel could be some of the issues with DNA modifications - could it potentially effect our future evolution?</p><p>Just some questions and thoughts.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm actually curious how much these " sicknesses " play a role in our future evolution .
I 'm no geneticist but I 'm guessing that alot of these genetic transformations are mutations of some sort or another .
If this is the case could these mutations eventually change into something else ?
I mean when the dinosaurs arms started getting smaller and smaller , eventually evolving into wings , etc .
do you think somewhere , it might have appeared strange or different ?
What about skin color , hair color , etc. ?
Do you think that variations appeared strange at first , or even consider some defect or disease ?
Could color-blindness or even blindness be some mutations that may after thousands of years lead to some variations in the species ?
If so , what do you feel could be some of the issues with DNA modifications - could it potentially effect our future evolution ? Just some questions and thoughts .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm actually curious how much these "sicknesses" play a role in our future evolution.
I'm no geneticist but I'm guessing that alot of these genetic transformations are mutations of some sort or another.
If this is the case could these mutations eventually change into something else?
I mean when the dinosaurs arms started getting smaller and smaller, eventually evolving into wings, etc.
do you think somewhere, it might have appeared strange or different?
What about skin color, hair color, etc.?
Do you think that variations appeared strange at first, or even consider some defect or disease?
Could color-blindness or even blindness be some mutations that may after thousands of years lead to some variations in the species?
If so, what do you feel could be some of the issues with DNA modifications - could it potentially effect our future evolution?Just some questions and thoughts.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31646652</id>
	<title>Re:Consenting adults</title>
	<author>MartinSchou</author>
	<datestamp>1269784080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>If I want to put a drug into my body, it's my right.</p></div></blockquote><p>I'm sure that'll make an interesting argument if you are arrested for having heroin, cocaine, LSD, ecstasy, magic mushrooms and various other illegal drugs on you. Even if they are only for your own consumption.</p><p>I agree that it should be up to me to decide, what I put into my body, to the extent that it is possible, but legally that just isn't the case.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If I want to put a drug into my body , it 's my right.I 'm sure that 'll make an interesting argument if you are arrested for having heroin , cocaine , LSD , ecstasy , magic mushrooms and various other illegal drugs on you .
Even if they are only for your own consumption.I agree that it should be up to me to decide , what I put into my body , to the extent that it is possible , but legally that just is n't the case .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If I want to put a drug into my body, it's my right.I'm sure that'll make an interesting argument if you are arrested for having heroin, cocaine, LSD, ecstasy, magic mushrooms and various other illegal drugs on you.
Even if they are only for your own consumption.I agree that it should be up to me to decide, what I put into my body, to the extent that it is possible, but legally that just isn't the case.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31634950</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635744</id>
	<title>Re:No.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269616500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, but some forms of colorblindness allow a <em>different</em> differentiation between colors.  For this reason the Army used to specifically recruit the colorblind to try and defeat some forms of camouflage.</p><p>I had a professor whose description of the foliage made me think he saw fall colors year-round, but I never bothered to find out if that was a related mechanism or just wild speculation on my part.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , but some forms of colorblindness allow a different differentiation between colors .
For this reason the Army used to specifically recruit the colorblind to try and defeat some forms of camouflage.I had a professor whose description of the foliage made me think he saw fall colors year-round , but I never bothered to find out if that was a related mechanism or just wild speculation on my part .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, but some forms of colorblindness allow a different differentiation between colors.
For this reason the Army used to specifically recruit the colorblind to try and defeat some forms of camouflage.I had a professor whose description of the foliage made me think he saw fall colors year-round, but I never bothered to find out if that was a related mechanism or just wild speculation on my part.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635022</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31711758</id>
	<title>anonymous</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1270216800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Color blindness makes it near impossible to see Cyan/Red Anaglyphs.<br>As a Stereographer, If I had a child that turned out to be color blind... and there was a procedure that could let them see color, I would want to be able to give them that as an option.</p><p>As with all medical advances (and technological advances)... the developments... and options they provide aren't moral dilemmas... it's what you do with those options.</p><p>Mood medications have uses (anti-depressants can be helpful for people that struggle with depression, for long-term, or short-term).</p><p>What I wish people would focus on... is not the moral impact of giving someone without site, vision... or someone who is deaf, the gift of sound.<br>I wish people would focus on the misuse and over prescription of Mood medications.</p><p>A.D.D. medications are the worst.<br>The human mind is in a constant state of development from childhood... into adulthood.</p><p>If a child has difficulty paying attention... or sitting still... it's time to deploy a different teaching style for the child in question.</p><p>I was given A.D.D. meds on two occasions durring my childhood.</p><p>Before meds... I was a happy-go-lucky child.  Within the 1st month of Ritalin, I went from an imaginative energetic child, to a robotic, paranoid, hypochondriac.  I pulled out all of my eyelashes (and I have no idea why).<br>I was nine years old... and had my 1st suicidal thoughts.</p><p>After I was taken off of Ritalin I went back to somewhat normal after about 1 year.  I struggled with depression occasionally.<br>2 Years later, another lazy teacher convinced my parents to try meds again... Norpramin.</p><p>This time within a month I stopped sleeping altogether, started hallucinating.  I became dehydrated, my spit turned to foam, my lips bled onto my pillow every morning.<br>I became even more paranoid, and depressed than before.  I was so emotionally unstable that I had to be pulled out of school, and weened off of the meds.</p><p>Even a year after being weened from the meds I still had extreme mood swings for no reason.  I would be at my desk and my pencil would break... and I'd laugh at it hysterically... and then start crying.</p><p>All throughout my teenage years... and into adulthood I continued to struggle with mood swings, and depression, that had never been present before I was put on meds.</p><p>I tried all kinds of mood meds to control this.</p><p>It wasn't until age 28 that I finally felt emotionally stable enough to ween myself from depression meds.<br>Now that I am med free, I've become more creative.  More social.  More easygoing... and generally... more happy.</p><p>It took me 18 years to recover from the damage that A.D.D. meds did to me as a child.<br>That's 18 years I could have been making more friends, creating more art, being generally more productive, and more happy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Color blindness makes it near impossible to see Cyan/Red Anaglyphs.As a Stereographer , If I had a child that turned out to be color blind... and there was a procedure that could let them see color , I would want to be able to give them that as an option.As with all medical advances ( and technological advances ) ... the developments... and options they provide are n't moral dilemmas... it 's what you do with those options.Mood medications have uses ( anti-depressants can be helpful for people that struggle with depression , for long-term , or short-term ) .What I wish people would focus on... is not the moral impact of giving someone without site , vision... or someone who is deaf , the gift of sound.I wish people would focus on the misuse and over prescription of Mood medications.A.D.D .
medications are the worst.The human mind is in a constant state of development from childhood... into adulthood.If a child has difficulty paying attention... or sitting still... it 's time to deploy a different teaching style for the child in question.I was given A.D.D .
meds on two occasions durring my childhood.Before meds... I was a happy-go-lucky child .
Within the 1st month of Ritalin , I went from an imaginative energetic child , to a robotic , paranoid , hypochondriac .
I pulled out all of my eyelashes ( and I have no idea why ) .I was nine years old... and had my 1st suicidal thoughts.After I was taken off of Ritalin I went back to somewhat normal after about 1 year .
I struggled with depression occasionally.2 Years later , another lazy teacher convinced my parents to try meds again... Norpramin.This time within a month I stopped sleeping altogether , started hallucinating .
I became dehydrated , my spit turned to foam , my lips bled onto my pillow every morning.I became even more paranoid , and depressed than before .
I was so emotionally unstable that I had to be pulled out of school , and weened off of the meds.Even a year after being weened from the meds I still had extreme mood swings for no reason .
I would be at my desk and my pencil would break... and I 'd laugh at it hysterically... and then start crying.All throughout my teenage years... and into adulthood I continued to struggle with mood swings , and depression , that had never been present before I was put on meds.I tried all kinds of mood meds to control this.It was n't until age 28 that I finally felt emotionally stable enough to ween myself from depression meds.Now that I am med free , I 've become more creative .
More social .
More easygoing... and generally... more happy.It took me 18 years to recover from the damage that A.D.D .
meds did to me as a child.That 's 18 years I could have been making more friends , creating more art , being generally more productive , and more happy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Color blindness makes it near impossible to see Cyan/Red Anaglyphs.As a Stereographer, If I had a child that turned out to be color blind... and there was a procedure that could let them see color, I would want to be able to give them that as an option.As with all medical advances (and technological advances)... the developments... and options they provide aren't moral dilemmas... it's what you do with those options.Mood medications have uses (anti-depressants can be helpful for people that struggle with depression, for long-term, or short-term).What I wish people would focus on... is not the moral impact of giving someone without site, vision... or someone who is deaf, the gift of sound.I wish people would focus on the misuse and over prescription of Mood medications.A.D.D.
medications are the worst.The human mind is in a constant state of development from childhood... into adulthood.If a child has difficulty paying attention... or sitting still... it's time to deploy a different teaching style for the child in question.I was given A.D.D.
meds on two occasions durring my childhood.Before meds... I was a happy-go-lucky child.
Within the 1st month of Ritalin, I went from an imaginative energetic child, to a robotic, paranoid, hypochondriac.
I pulled out all of my eyelashes (and I have no idea why).I was nine years old... and had my 1st suicidal thoughts.After I was taken off of Ritalin I went back to somewhat normal after about 1 year.
I struggled with depression occasionally.2 Years later, another lazy teacher convinced my parents to try meds again... Norpramin.This time within a month I stopped sleeping altogether, started hallucinating.
I became dehydrated, my spit turned to foam, my lips bled onto my pillow every morning.I became even more paranoid, and depressed than before.
I was so emotionally unstable that I had to be pulled out of school, and weened off of the meds.Even a year after being weened from the meds I still had extreme mood swings for no reason.
I would be at my desk and my pencil would break... and I'd laugh at it hysterically... and then start crying.All throughout my teenage years... and into adulthood I continued to struggle with mood swings, and depression, that had never been present before I was put on meds.I tried all kinds of mood meds to control this.It wasn't until age 28 that I finally felt emotionally stable enough to ween myself from depression meds.Now that I am med free, I've become more creative.
More social.
More easygoing... and generally... more happy.It took me 18 years to recover from the damage that A.D.D.
meds did to me as a child.That's 18 years I could have been making more friends, creating more art, being generally more productive, and more happy.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635070</id>
	<title>as an extreme red-green colorblind person...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269612600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I say "fuck you" to your moral objection.  Color blindness is a disability.  It may not be anywhere near as serious as being handicapped, missing  an appendage, or say, a whole eye, but it does cause problems nonetheless.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I say " fuck you " to your moral objection .
Color blindness is a disability .
It may not be anywhere near as serious as being handicapped , missing an appendage , or say , a whole eye , but it does cause problems nonetheless .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I say "fuck you" to your moral objection.
Color blindness is a disability.
It may not be anywhere near as serious as being handicapped, missing  an appendage, or say, a whole eye, but it does cause problems nonetheless.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31655576</id>
	<title>Cochlear Implant argument all over again.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269869460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is the exact same argument that has been raging in the Deaf community since <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cochlear\_implant" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">Cochlear Implants</a> [wikipedia.org] became available.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is the exact same argument that has been raging in the Deaf community since Cochlear Implants [ wikipedia.org ] became available .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is the exact same argument that has been raging in the Deaf community since Cochlear Implants [wikipedia.org] became available.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635768</id>
	<title>Re:The Qualia beast raises its head again</title>
	<author>eh2o</author>
	<datestamp>1269616620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The answer is they have extra depth, actually extra spectral resolution.</p><p>Color perception is a byproduct of the retina being stimulated with a particular spectral distribution of light. Its a spectral sampling, much like how the ear samples the spectral distribution of sound, but a totally different method and with much much lower resolution.</p><p>We all see the same spectra, some people get more or less information than others.  Mainly this manifests in differences in discrimination ability between colors as well as disagreement about what constitutes a "color match" between observers that are getting different information.</p><p>Debating about what this maps to in the head is mostly an exercise in mental masturbation, the brain simply integrates available information in a statistically optimal fashion.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The answer is they have extra depth , actually extra spectral resolution.Color perception is a byproduct of the retina being stimulated with a particular spectral distribution of light .
Its a spectral sampling , much like how the ear samples the spectral distribution of sound , but a totally different method and with much much lower resolution.We all see the same spectra , some people get more or less information than others .
Mainly this manifests in differences in discrimination ability between colors as well as disagreement about what constitutes a " color match " between observers that are getting different information.Debating about what this maps to in the head is mostly an exercise in mental masturbation , the brain simply integrates available information in a statistically optimal fashion .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The answer is they have extra depth, actually extra spectral resolution.Color perception is a byproduct of the retina being stimulated with a particular spectral distribution of light.
Its a spectral sampling, much like how the ear samples the spectral distribution of sound, but a totally different method and with much much lower resolution.We all see the same spectra, some people get more or less information than others.
Mainly this manifests in differences in discrimination ability between colors as well as disagreement about what constitutes a "color match" between observers that are getting different information.Debating about what this maps to in the head is mostly an exercise in mental masturbation, the brain simply integrates available information in a statistically optimal fashion.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31634968</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31637296</id>
	<title>Re:I think I'll pass on this.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269630420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm color deficient as well (protanomaly)and have the same thoughts. I don't want to lose what I've discovered to be superior pattern recognition ability for the sake of more color recognition ability. But by some age, our brains may be permanently wired this way and the ability to see colors better might not make a difference.<br>For the rest of you out there with correct color sight, I'll try to explain. I can never be quite sure of what color I'm seeing. Orange, green, brown... Frequently difficult to say which. So, I tend to ignore the colors. For a simple example, how do I tell if there's an orange in a tree to eat? Simple for the color sighted, it's ORANGE. For those of us without that ability to distinguish those colors, we have to identify it solely by it's shape and pattern. Years spent doing this kind of thing does make our world seem a little different from yours.<br>I remember when I was in high school and my brother told me that they used to use color blind people to spot the tanks in the world war because they were immune to color camouflage. I remember being totally surprised because at the time I thought they just painted the tanks that way to make them stand out more so people would see the tanks coming and run in fear! Honestly, you couldn't make it stand out more if you painted it yellow with big black polka dots. You can color it any way you want, it will always look the same... like a tank.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm color deficient as well ( protanomaly ) and have the same thoughts .
I do n't want to lose what I 've discovered to be superior pattern recognition ability for the sake of more color recognition ability .
But by some age , our brains may be permanently wired this way and the ability to see colors better might not make a difference.For the rest of you out there with correct color sight , I 'll try to explain .
I can never be quite sure of what color I 'm seeing .
Orange , green , brown... Frequently difficult to say which .
So , I tend to ignore the colors .
For a simple example , how do I tell if there 's an orange in a tree to eat ?
Simple for the color sighted , it 's ORANGE .
For those of us without that ability to distinguish those colors , we have to identify it solely by it 's shape and pattern .
Years spent doing this kind of thing does make our world seem a little different from yours.I remember when I was in high school and my brother told me that they used to use color blind people to spot the tanks in the world war because they were immune to color camouflage .
I remember being totally surprised because at the time I thought they just painted the tanks that way to make them stand out more so people would see the tanks coming and run in fear !
Honestly , you could n't make it stand out more if you painted it yellow with big black polka dots .
You can color it any way you want , it will always look the same... like a tank .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm color deficient as well (protanomaly)and have the same thoughts.
I don't want to lose what I've discovered to be superior pattern recognition ability for the sake of more color recognition ability.
But by some age, our brains may be permanently wired this way and the ability to see colors better might not make a difference.For the rest of you out there with correct color sight, I'll try to explain.
I can never be quite sure of what color I'm seeing.
Orange, green, brown... Frequently difficult to say which.
So, I tend to ignore the colors.
For a simple example, how do I tell if there's an orange in a tree to eat?
Simple for the color sighted, it's ORANGE.
For those of us without that ability to distinguish those colors, we have to identify it solely by it's shape and pattern.
Years spent doing this kind of thing does make our world seem a little different from yours.I remember when I was in high school and my brother told me that they used to use color blind people to spot the tanks in the world war because they were immune to color camouflage.
I remember being totally surprised because at the time I thought they just painted the tanks that way to make them stand out more so people would see the tanks coming and run in fear!
Honestly, you couldn't make it stand out more if you painted it yellow with big black polka dots.
You can color it any way you want, it will always look the same... like a tank.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635638</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635176</id>
	<title>Will they be able to use this technique</title>
	<author>n6kuy</author>
	<datestamp>1269613140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... to restore our lost <a href="http://www.negativland.com/squant/story.html" title="negativland.com">squant vision</a> [negativland.com]?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... to restore our lost squant vision [ negativland.com ] ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... to restore our lost squant vision [negativland.com]?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31638778</id>
	<title>Re:as an extreme red-green colorblind person...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269698340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When this is the "moral dilemma" we choose to spend time debating, it reminds me of how blind we all have become in our truely privileged lives.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When this is the " moral dilemma " we choose to spend time debating , it reminds me of how blind we all have become in our truely privileged lives .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When this is the "moral dilemma" we choose to spend time debating, it reminds me of how blind we all have become in our truely privileged lives.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635070</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31634976</id>
	<title>'normalize' humans to a threshold of experience</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269612180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No such conspiracy.</p><p>Well, see you in a bit.  I gotta run down to Wal-Mart to pick up some LSD.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No such conspiracy.Well , see you in a bit .
I got ta run down to Wal-Mart to pick up some LSD .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No such conspiracy.Well, see you in a bit.
I gotta run down to Wal-Mart to pick up some LSD.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31637112</id>
	<title>WTF ?</title>
	<author>daveime</author>
	<datestamp>1269627660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How can helping someone be "morally wrong" ?</p><p>I'm pretty sure if you took a survey of colour-blind people, there are very few who would choose to remain colour-blind.</p><p>This isn't some aesthetic thing like having a nose job or botox injections for vanity / popularities sake. Neither is it a racial / cultural thing so that people can be "normalized" and assisted to escape from some perceived minority. It's about helping someone with an annoying affliction.</p><p>What's next ? Are we going to start questioning the morality of helping people with short-sightedness or hearing impediments, just in case it further marginalizes those tiny minority who choose NOT to have corrective lenses or a hearing aid ?</p><p>Fucking namby-pamby nonsense from do-gooders with too much time on their hands, if you ask me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How can helping someone be " morally wrong " ? I 'm pretty sure if you took a survey of colour-blind people , there are very few who would choose to remain colour-blind.This is n't some aesthetic thing like having a nose job or botox injections for vanity / popularities sake .
Neither is it a racial / cultural thing so that people can be " normalized " and assisted to escape from some perceived minority .
It 's about helping someone with an annoying affliction.What 's next ?
Are we going to start questioning the morality of helping people with short-sightedness or hearing impediments , just in case it further marginalizes those tiny minority who choose NOT to have corrective lenses or a hearing aid ? Fucking namby-pamby nonsense from do-gooders with too much time on their hands , if you ask me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How can helping someone be "morally wrong" ?I'm pretty sure if you took a survey of colour-blind people, there are very few who would choose to remain colour-blind.This isn't some aesthetic thing like having a nose job or botox injections for vanity / popularities sake.
Neither is it a racial / cultural thing so that people can be "normalized" and assisted to escape from some perceived minority.
It's about helping someone with an annoying affliction.What's next ?
Are we going to start questioning the morality of helping people with short-sightedness or hearing impediments, just in case it further marginalizes those tiny minority who choose NOT to have corrective lenses or a hearing aid ?Fucking namby-pamby nonsense from do-gooders with too much time on their hands, if you ask me.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635842</id>
	<title>Asking the wrong question</title>
	<author>Angst Badger</author>
	<datestamp>1269617160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I do my best not to be irritated by this line of questioning, not least because it is almost always a rhetorical question with an implied "No", or else just a stalling tactic. But the most irritating thing is that it's the wrong question.</p><p>The question we should be asking is NOT whether we want to alter human genes. The real question here is whether *I* want to alter my own genes, and what the hell business that is of anyone's but mine and my doctor's. If the alteration extends to my reproductive cells, <i>then</i> there's a broader question, but I'd be perfectly willing to be sterilized as a precondition of curing any number of potential genetic disorders. As it happens, I had a vasectomy years ago, so I have long since ceased to be a concern for the human gene pool.</p><p>Should we be curing [insert condition here]? No. Should we allow people to voluntarily seek out whatever medical treatment they need (or want, if they can afford it)? Yes.</p><p>It's bad enough that we have religion interfering with people's medical choices. We don't need to open the door for idle philosophical speculation to deny people medical treatment.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do my best not to be irritated by this line of questioning , not least because it is almost always a rhetorical question with an implied " No " , or else just a stalling tactic .
But the most irritating thing is that it 's the wrong question.The question we should be asking is NOT whether we want to alter human genes .
The real question here is whether * I * want to alter my own genes , and what the hell business that is of anyone 's but mine and my doctor 's .
If the alteration extends to my reproductive cells , then there 's a broader question , but I 'd be perfectly willing to be sterilized as a precondition of curing any number of potential genetic disorders .
As it happens , I had a vasectomy years ago , so I have long since ceased to be a concern for the human gene pool.Should we be curing [ insert condition here ] ?
No. Should we allow people to voluntarily seek out whatever medical treatment they need ( or want , if they can afford it ) ?
Yes.It 's bad enough that we have religion interfering with people 's medical choices .
We do n't need to open the door for idle philosophical speculation to deny people medical treatment .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I do my best not to be irritated by this line of questioning, not least because it is almost always a rhetorical question with an implied "No", or else just a stalling tactic.
But the most irritating thing is that it's the wrong question.The question we should be asking is NOT whether we want to alter human genes.
The real question here is whether *I* want to alter my own genes, and what the hell business that is of anyone's but mine and my doctor's.
If the alteration extends to my reproductive cells, then there's a broader question, but I'd be perfectly willing to be sterilized as a precondition of curing any number of potential genetic disorders.
As it happens, I had a vasectomy years ago, so I have long since ceased to be a concern for the human gene pool.Should we be curing [insert condition here]?
No. Should we allow people to voluntarily seek out whatever medical treatment they need (or want, if they can afford it)?
Yes.It's bad enough that we have religion interfering with people's medical choices.
We don't need to open the door for idle philosophical speculation to deny people medical treatment.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31637042</id>
	<title>Of course a non-colourblind person would ask this</title>
	<author>Kryptonut</author>
	<datestamp>1269626820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Those of us that ARE colourblind would LOVE to have it corrected.  People don't realise how much of an impact it can have.</p><p>I work in IT, not because it's what I dreamt of doing as a kid, but because I wasn't allowed to be a Pilot, a Captain (my father used to drive tugboats for a living) or even a Police officer.</p><p>If you haven't experienced it first hand, then you have no right to question whether people who do experience it every single day of their lives, should be "allowed" to change it.</p><p>I want the same employment opportunities as everyone else, and I want my nephew (son of my sister) to have the same employment opportunities as everyone else too, whether he's inherited the gene or not as well.</p><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr>/rant</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Those of us that ARE colourblind would LOVE to have it corrected .
People do n't realise how much of an impact it can have.I work in IT , not because it 's what I dreamt of doing as a kid , but because I was n't allowed to be a Pilot , a Captain ( my father used to drive tugboats for a living ) or even a Police officer.If you have n't experienced it first hand , then you have no right to question whether people who do experience it every single day of their lives , should be " allowed " to change it.I want the same employment opportunities as everyone else , and I want my nephew ( son of my sister ) to have the same employment opportunities as everyone else too , whether he 's inherited the gene or not as well .
/rant</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Those of us that ARE colourblind would LOVE to have it corrected.
People don't realise how much of an impact it can have.I work in IT, not because it's what I dreamt of doing as a kid, but because I wasn't allowed to be a Pilot, a Captain (my father used to drive tugboats for a living) or even a Police officer.If you haven't experienced it first hand, then you have no right to question whether people who do experience it every single day of their lives, should be "allowed" to change it.I want the same employment opportunities as everyone else, and I want my nephew (son of my sister) to have the same employment opportunities as everyone else too, whether he's inherited the gene or not as well.
/rant</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31639994</id>
	<title>Eliminate small print!</title>
	<author>argent</author>
	<datestamp>1269709320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>People wouldn't need eyeglasses if documents didn't have small print! They should mandate a minimum 72 point type in all books and displays instead!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>People would n't need eyeglasses if documents did n't have small print !
They should mandate a minimum 72 point type in all books and displays instead !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>People wouldn't need eyeglasses if documents didn't have small print!
They should mandate a minimum 72 point type in all books and displays instead!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31660268</id>
	<title>Re:The Qualia beast raises its head again</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269891000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Women that have a fourth cone have one between red and green wavelengths due to an X chromosome mutation.  Other animals have 4th cones (such as birds and reptiles) in ranges outside ours.  Interestingly, these 4th cone women often have colorblind sons.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Women that have a fourth cone have one between red and green wavelengths due to an X chromosome mutation .
Other animals have 4th cones ( such as birds and reptiles ) in ranges outside ours .
Interestingly , these 4th cone women often have colorblind sons .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Women that have a fourth cone have one between red and green wavelengths due to an X chromosome mutation.
Other animals have 4th cones (such as birds and reptiles) in ranges outside ours.
Interestingly, these 4th cone women often have colorblind sons.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31634968</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31636392</id>
	<title>Re:The Qualia beast raises its head again</title>
	<author>SQL Error</author>
	<datestamp>1269621060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The concept of qualia being logically incoherent under any self-consistent metaphysical position, this problem doesn't worry me a whole lot.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The concept of qualia being logically incoherent under any self-consistent metaphysical position , this problem does n't worry me a whole lot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The concept of qualia being logically incoherent under any self-consistent metaphysical position, this problem doesn't worry me a whole lot.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31634968</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31648216</id>
	<title>Seems like kind of a grey area</title>
	<author>KingTank</author>
	<datestamp>1269798720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>...or is that more of a cadet blue?</htmltext>
<tokenext>...or is that more of a cadet blue ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...or is that more of a cadet blue?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31646188</id>
	<title>Re:As a colorblind man</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269773760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> ||| Seriously, how is this possibly a moral argument?!?</p><p>You missed the point as many before you !</p><p>The argument was never about curing diseases or disabilities but about the procedure involving an DNA altering virus which in my personal opinion is both immoral and dangerous.<br>Being ''shortsighted'' though, cannot be corrected by modern medicine.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>| | | Seriously , how is this possibly a moral argument ? !
? You missed the point as many before you ! The argument was never about curing diseases or disabilities but about the procedure involving an DNA altering virus which in my personal opinion is both immoral and dangerous.Being ''shortsighted' ' though , can not be corrected by modern medicine .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> ||| Seriously, how is this possibly a moral argument?!
?You missed the point as many before you !The argument was never about curing diseases or disabilities but about the procedure involving an DNA altering virus which in my personal opinion is both immoral and dangerous.Being ''shortsighted'' though, cannot be corrected by modern medicine.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635134</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31658334</id>
	<title>This is freaking moronic</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269882240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This isn't eugenics or baby engineering here.  My daughter is mildly autistic, I love her more than myself, but I would cure her autism in an instant.  Believe or not, some parents of autistic children think I'm a monster for that.</p><p>What's so hard about this: "Would you like us to fix X?"  I suppose the word fix implies something is broken, I'll let the PC wordsmiths work on some fluffy feel good substitute.</p><p>But holy crap, it's colorblindness, an affliction for which there is practically no social stigma, yet it does make colorblind folks' lives harder, so yeah, get a cure and offer it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is n't eugenics or baby engineering here .
My daughter is mildly autistic , I love her more than myself , but I would cure her autism in an instant .
Believe or not , some parents of autistic children think I 'm a monster for that.What 's so hard about this : " Would you like us to fix X ?
" I suppose the word fix implies something is broken , I 'll let the PC wordsmiths work on some fluffy feel good substitute.But holy crap , it 's colorblindness , an affliction for which there is practically no social stigma , yet it does make colorblind folks ' lives harder , so yeah , get a cure and offer it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This isn't eugenics or baby engineering here.
My daughter is mildly autistic, I love her more than myself, but I would cure her autism in an instant.
Believe or not, some parents of autistic children think I'm a monster for that.What's so hard about this: "Would you like us to fix X?
"  I suppose the word fix implies something is broken, I'll let the PC wordsmiths work on some fluffy feel good substitute.But holy crap, it's colorblindness, an affliction for which there is practically no social stigma, yet it does make colorblind folks' lives harder, so yeah, get a cure and offer it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31638240</id>
	<title>Re:As a colorblind man</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269690420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Color blind aid for the iPhone. Augmented reality app the let's you tell red from green.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Color blind aid for the iPhone .
Augmented reality app the let 's you tell red from green .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Color blind aid for the iPhone.
Augmented reality app the let's you tell red from green.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635134</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635984</id>
	<title>it's complicated and it gets ugly</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269618300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A lot of commentors have said, "just ask the person if they'd like to be cured", and of course that's the right answer, for a cure which can be applied to an adult.</p><p>The uglier questions come up with things like cochlear implants (for deafness), when the cure has to be applied to a child who is not old enough to decide (or even speak).  The deaf community is arguing about this - many of them feel militantly that a child born deaf to deaf parents should be left deaf, and that curing the child is a form of cultural genocide.  I'm really uncomfortable with this argument.  What if the parents wanted to make their hearing child deaf, with a surgical procedure?  Would that be okay?  How about blind parents?  On the other hand, what about a pill that an African American child can be given once a day to lighten their skin a few shades, so they can pass for white, or to gain advantage within the black community wherein there is still some shade prejudice?  And then there's selective abortion for the really bad problems.</p><p>Personally I think fixing disabilities is a no brainer - color blindness, deafness, blindness, and so on.  It seems like child abuse not to fix these if doing so is affordable and low-risk, no less so than inflicting blindness or deafness on a child intentionally.  Normally I'd rather leave these things up to parents, but we don't leave discipline up to parents if it involves breaking the kid's bones - there are limits to choice where minors are concerned.</p><p>Note that I used words like "fix" and "disability" to plainly describe missing sensory abilities.  The deaf community would disagree strongly about this, but I think they're wrong.  It is objectively better to have an additional ability, than not to have it.  The degree to which it is better depends on the ability, the individual, and their community, but I would always rather be able to hear music or see or see colors, than not to.  That's not the same thing as saying a person who has the ability is better than one who does not, and it is not useful to confuse the two.</p><p>The societal question is where to draw the line between abusive denial of abilities, and allowance for harmless individual differences like skin shade, weight, acne propensity, and gender or gender preference.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A lot of commentors have said , " just ask the person if they 'd like to be cured " , and of course that 's the right answer , for a cure which can be applied to an adult.The uglier questions come up with things like cochlear implants ( for deafness ) , when the cure has to be applied to a child who is not old enough to decide ( or even speak ) .
The deaf community is arguing about this - many of them feel militantly that a child born deaf to deaf parents should be left deaf , and that curing the child is a form of cultural genocide .
I 'm really uncomfortable with this argument .
What if the parents wanted to make their hearing child deaf , with a surgical procedure ?
Would that be okay ?
How about blind parents ?
On the other hand , what about a pill that an African American child can be given once a day to lighten their skin a few shades , so they can pass for white , or to gain advantage within the black community wherein there is still some shade prejudice ?
And then there 's selective abortion for the really bad problems.Personally I think fixing disabilities is a no brainer - color blindness , deafness , blindness , and so on .
It seems like child abuse not to fix these if doing so is affordable and low-risk , no less so than inflicting blindness or deafness on a child intentionally .
Normally I 'd rather leave these things up to parents , but we do n't leave discipline up to parents if it involves breaking the kid 's bones - there are limits to choice where minors are concerned.Note that I used words like " fix " and " disability " to plainly describe missing sensory abilities .
The deaf community would disagree strongly about this , but I think they 're wrong .
It is objectively better to have an additional ability , than not to have it .
The degree to which it is better depends on the ability , the individual , and their community , but I would always rather be able to hear music or see or see colors , than not to .
That 's not the same thing as saying a person who has the ability is better than one who does not , and it is not useful to confuse the two.The societal question is where to draw the line between abusive denial of abilities , and allowance for harmless individual differences like skin shade , weight , acne propensity , and gender or gender preference .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A lot of commentors have said, "just ask the person if they'd like to be cured", and of course that's the right answer, for a cure which can be applied to an adult.The uglier questions come up with things like cochlear implants (for deafness), when the cure has to be applied to a child who is not old enough to decide (or even speak).
The deaf community is arguing about this - many of them feel militantly that a child born deaf to deaf parents should be left deaf, and that curing the child is a form of cultural genocide.
I'm really uncomfortable with this argument.
What if the parents wanted to make their hearing child deaf, with a surgical procedure?
Would that be okay?
How about blind parents?
On the other hand, what about a pill that an African American child can be given once a day to lighten their skin a few shades, so they can pass for white, or to gain advantage within the black community wherein there is still some shade prejudice?
And then there's selective abortion for the really bad problems.Personally I think fixing disabilities is a no brainer - color blindness, deafness, blindness, and so on.
It seems like child abuse not to fix these if doing so is affordable and low-risk, no less so than inflicting blindness or deafness on a child intentionally.
Normally I'd rather leave these things up to parents, but we don't leave discipline up to parents if it involves breaking the kid's bones - there are limits to choice where minors are concerned.Note that I used words like "fix" and "disability" to plainly describe missing sensory abilities.
The deaf community would disagree strongly about this, but I think they're wrong.
It is objectively better to have an additional ability, than not to have it.
The degree to which it is better depends on the ability, the individual, and their community, but I would always rather be able to hear music or see or see colors, than not to.
That's not the same thing as saying a person who has the ability is better than one who does not, and it is not useful to confuse the two.The societal question is where to draw the line between abusive denial of abilities, and allowance for harmless individual differences like skin shade, weight, acne propensity, and gender or gender preference.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31639496</id>
	<title>Re:As a colorblind man</title>
	<author>davidwr</author>
	<datestamp>1269705360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If I'm deaf and that can be fixed, awesome.</p></div><p>There are deaf people who would argue with you on that one.</p><p>By the way, just because your color-blindness could be fixed doesn't mean your brain could learn to process the new information.  There have been several people who were blind from birth or a very young age and as adults had their sight given to them through medicine.  They had a hard time of it.  In at least one case in the last 20 years, the person went back to living as a blind person.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If I 'm deaf and that can be fixed , awesome.There are deaf people who would argue with you on that one.By the way , just because your color-blindness could be fixed does n't mean your brain could learn to process the new information .
There have been several people who were blind from birth or a very young age and as adults had their sight given to them through medicine .
They had a hard time of it .
In at least one case in the last 20 years , the person went back to living as a blind person .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If I'm deaf and that can be fixed, awesome.There are deaf people who would argue with you on that one.By the way, just because your color-blindness could be fixed doesn't mean your brain could learn to process the new information.
There have been several people who were blind from birth or a very young age and as adults had their sight given to them through medicine.
They had a hard time of it.
In at least one case in the last 20 years, the person went back to living as a blind person.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635134</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31640860</id>
	<title>Re:as an extreme red-green colorblind person...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269714360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's a disability for sure.  One that is ignored by everyone and is VERY limiting to the affected person.</p><p>Colorblindness affects up to 20\% of certain populations (about 10\% of the entire male population).  1 in 10 boys who dream of growing up to be a fighter pilot, helicopter crewman, astronaut, police officer, fireman, secret agent, special operations commando, biologist, scientist, etc... will have reality come crashing down on them when they flunk that one little colored dot test after 15 years of dreaming about the exciting life ahead of them.</p><p>They will grow up wearing mis-matched socks and be made fun of, without knowing it.  They'll wear pink shirts in public, without knowing it.  They'll date redheaded girls, without knowing it.</p><p>They'll get a drivers license and forever fear the day they are forced to take that little colored dot test to renew it; knowing they'll have to cheat the test to keep their license.</p><p>Those same boys will be forced into other boring occupations where their disability will still put them at a disadvantage.  They can't see the results of the graphs and charts on powerpoint presentations because everyone uses color to distinguish the lines and symbols.  They'll be forced to find alternate ways detecting colors so they can "fit in" and display graphs, charts, and results on powerpoint presentations like everyone else or find the "only bright blue" rental car on the lot in the sea of hundreds of other apparently "bright blue" rental cars.</p><p>In the end, they lie to nearly everyone, everyday in order to keep the job they have, because normal color vision is "necessary" for more than 50\% of all professional jobs.</p><p>So, is it morally OK to provide a permanent treatment for this condition?  Hell Yes!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's a disability for sure .
One that is ignored by everyone and is VERY limiting to the affected person.Colorblindness affects up to 20 \ % of certain populations ( about 10 \ % of the entire male population ) .
1 in 10 boys who dream of growing up to be a fighter pilot , helicopter crewman , astronaut , police officer , fireman , secret agent , special operations commando , biologist , scientist , etc... will have reality come crashing down on them when they flunk that one little colored dot test after 15 years of dreaming about the exciting life ahead of them.They will grow up wearing mis-matched socks and be made fun of , without knowing it .
They 'll wear pink shirts in public , without knowing it .
They 'll date redheaded girls , without knowing it.They 'll get a drivers license and forever fear the day they are forced to take that little colored dot test to renew it ; knowing they 'll have to cheat the test to keep their license.Those same boys will be forced into other boring occupations where their disability will still put them at a disadvantage .
They ca n't see the results of the graphs and charts on powerpoint presentations because everyone uses color to distinguish the lines and symbols .
They 'll be forced to find alternate ways detecting colors so they can " fit in " and display graphs , charts , and results on powerpoint presentations like everyone else or find the " only bright blue " rental car on the lot in the sea of hundreds of other apparently " bright blue " rental cars.In the end , they lie to nearly everyone , everyday in order to keep the job they have , because normal color vision is " necessary " for more than 50 \ % of all professional jobs.So , is it morally OK to provide a permanent treatment for this condition ?
Hell Yes !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's a disability for sure.
One that is ignored by everyone and is VERY limiting to the affected person.Colorblindness affects up to 20\% of certain populations (about 10\% of the entire male population).
1 in 10 boys who dream of growing up to be a fighter pilot, helicopter crewman, astronaut, police officer, fireman, secret agent, special operations commando, biologist, scientist, etc... will have reality come crashing down on them when they flunk that one little colored dot test after 15 years of dreaming about the exciting life ahead of them.They will grow up wearing mis-matched socks and be made fun of, without knowing it.
They'll wear pink shirts in public, without knowing it.
They'll date redheaded girls, without knowing it.They'll get a drivers license and forever fear the day they are forced to take that little colored dot test to renew it; knowing they'll have to cheat the test to keep their license.Those same boys will be forced into other boring occupations where their disability will still put them at a disadvantage.
They can't see the results of the graphs and charts on powerpoint presentations because everyone uses color to distinguish the lines and symbols.
They'll be forced to find alternate ways detecting colors so they can "fit in" and display graphs, charts, and results on powerpoint presentations like everyone else or find the "only bright blue" rental car on the lot in the sea of hundreds of other apparently "bright blue" rental cars.In the end, they lie to nearly everyone, everyday in order to keep the job they have, because normal color vision is "necessary" for more than 50\% of all professional jobs.So, is it morally OK to provide a permanent treatment for this condition?
Hell Yes!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635070</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31648964</id>
	<title>Re:What the... I don't even...</title>
	<author>magus\_melchior</author>
	<datestamp>1269803820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A "what if someone did find a cure for cancer" drama aired recently on the Japanese cable/satellite network called <i>Pandora</i>. If something so valuable and industry-altering a cure was discovered, there will be no shortage of politicians and faculty who will try to use it for personal gain, nor will there be a shortage of corporations who wish to maximize its sale while minimizing the royalties and labor. Other references to opening the Pandora's Box of fixing "faults" that make us human as much as our intellect does include <i>Gundam SEED</i>* and the Eugenics Wars/Augments theme in the <i>Star Trek</i> franchise. Admittedly these are works of fiction that flesh out the discussion by taking the consequences to their extremes, but it demonstrates that a society where genetically superior humans become a sort of oppressive "master race" is not at all hard to imagine.</p><p>Put simply, if we are to venture into improving our genetic selves in ways other than natural selection, <i>not</i> asking the "stupid, half-witted, pseudo-concern" questions merely because the answer seems obvious at the time may be the more irresponsible of paths.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A " what if someone did find a cure for cancer " drama aired recently on the Japanese cable/satellite network called Pandora .
If something so valuable and industry-altering a cure was discovered , there will be no shortage of politicians and faculty who will try to use it for personal gain , nor will there be a shortage of corporations who wish to maximize its sale while minimizing the royalties and labor .
Other references to opening the Pandora 's Box of fixing " faults " that make us human as much as our intellect does include Gundam SEED * and the Eugenics Wars/Augments theme in the Star Trek franchise .
Admittedly these are works of fiction that flesh out the discussion by taking the consequences to their extremes , but it demonstrates that a society where genetically superior humans become a sort of oppressive " master race " is not at all hard to imagine.Put simply , if we are to venture into improving our genetic selves in ways other than natural selection , not asking the " stupid , half-witted , pseudo-concern " questions merely because the answer seems obvious at the time may be the more irresponsible of paths .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A "what if someone did find a cure for cancer" drama aired recently on the Japanese cable/satellite network called Pandora.
If something so valuable and industry-altering a cure was discovered, there will be no shortage of politicians and faculty who will try to use it for personal gain, nor will there be a shortage of corporations who wish to maximize its sale while minimizing the royalties and labor.
Other references to opening the Pandora's Box of fixing "faults" that make us human as much as our intellect does include Gundam SEED* and the Eugenics Wars/Augments theme in the Star Trek franchise.
Admittedly these are works of fiction that flesh out the discussion by taking the consequences to their extremes, but it demonstrates that a society where genetically superior humans become a sort of oppressive "master race" is not at all hard to imagine.Put simply, if we are to venture into improving our genetic selves in ways other than natural selection, not asking the "stupid, half-witted, pseudo-concern" questions merely because the answer seems obvious at the time may be the more irresponsible of paths.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31634942</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31636458</id>
	<title>numbers on dots</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269621780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I always see two different numbers in a set of dots, when the fellow with the dots says "what number do you see", I say "i see two numbers, there.........",</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I always see two different numbers in a set of dots , when the fellow with the dots says " what number do you see " , I say " i see two numbers , there......... " ,</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I always see two different numbers in a set of dots, when the fellow with the dots says "what number do you see", I say "i see two numbers, there.........",</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31637656</id>
	<title>Cochlear implants</title>
	<author>QuzarDC</author>
	<datestamp>1269680880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It seems as if they are trying to liken this to the opposition of some of the deaf community to cochlear implants. A much better example would simply be poor eyesight. It's not as though colorblind people are typically unable to function easily in a world designed for the full spectrum'd (?) to the point where they form a communal bond.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It seems as if they are trying to liken this to the opposition of some of the deaf community to cochlear implants .
A much better example would simply be poor eyesight .
It 's not as though colorblind people are typically unable to function easily in a world designed for the full spectrum 'd ( ?
) to the point where they form a communal bond .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It seems as if they are trying to liken this to the opposition of some of the deaf community to cochlear implants.
A much better example would simply be poor eyesight.
It's not as though colorblind people are typically unable to function easily in a world designed for the full spectrum'd (?
) to the point where they form a communal bond.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635210</id>
	<title>No, that is a stupid question.</title>
	<author>h4rr4r</author>
	<datestamp>1269613320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It would not be any more morally wrong than me using contacts or glasses.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It would not be any more morally wrong than me using contacts or glasses .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It would not be any more morally wrong than me using contacts or glasses.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635134</id>
	<title>As a colorblind man</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269612960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If I could get my colorblindness fixed/cured/eliminated and it's affordable, I'd do it.  Seriously, it doesn't seem like a big deal, but there's stuff I simply don't see and I'm not even that color blind.  The orange paint on grass used by contractors?  Essentially invisible to me.  Entire fields are closed to me due to colorblindness.  Can't become an electrician due to color coding, for example.</p><p>The whole "moral" aspect is by people who think that an amputee shouldn't want their legs back just to be "normal" (obviously, an extreme example).</p><p>If I'm colorblind and that can be fixed, awesome.<br>If I'm blind and that can be fixed, awesome.<br>If I'm deaf and that can be fixed, awesome.<br>If I'm paraplegic and that can be fixed, awesome.</p><p>Seriously, how is this possibly a moral argument?!?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If I could get my colorblindness fixed/cured/eliminated and it 's affordable , I 'd do it .
Seriously , it does n't seem like a big deal , but there 's stuff I simply do n't see and I 'm not even that color blind .
The orange paint on grass used by contractors ?
Essentially invisible to me .
Entire fields are closed to me due to colorblindness .
Ca n't become an electrician due to color coding , for example.The whole " moral " aspect is by people who think that an amputee should n't want their legs back just to be " normal " ( obviously , an extreme example ) .If I 'm colorblind and that can be fixed , awesome.If I 'm blind and that can be fixed , awesome.If I 'm deaf and that can be fixed , awesome.If I 'm paraplegic and that can be fixed , awesome.Seriously , how is this possibly a moral argument ? !
?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If I could get my colorblindness fixed/cured/eliminated and it's affordable, I'd do it.
Seriously, it doesn't seem like a big deal, but there's stuff I simply don't see and I'm not even that color blind.
The orange paint on grass used by contractors?
Essentially invisible to me.
Entire fields are closed to me due to colorblindness.
Can't become an electrician due to color coding, for example.The whole "moral" aspect is by people who think that an amputee shouldn't want their legs back just to be "normal" (obviously, an extreme example).If I'm colorblind and that can be fixed, awesome.If I'm blind and that can be fixed, awesome.If I'm deaf and that can be fixed, awesome.If I'm paraplegic and that can be fixed, awesome.Seriously, how is this possibly a moral argument?!
?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635782</id>
	<title>Re:as an extreme red-green colorblind person...</title>
	<author>webdog314</author>
	<datestamp>1269616740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I agree. As an illustrator who has been stuck doing black &amp; white work all their life, I say hell yes I would like to see a full palette of color. Find that morally objectionable? Try wearing red contacts for a few weeks and then see if you still feel the same way.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree .
As an illustrator who has been stuck doing black &amp; white work all their life , I say hell yes I would like to see a full palette of color .
Find that morally objectionable ?
Try wearing red contacts for a few weeks and then see if you still feel the same way .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree.
As an illustrator who has been stuck doing black &amp; white work all their life, I say hell yes I would like to see a full palette of color.
Find that morally objectionable?
Try wearing red contacts for a few weeks and then see if you still feel the same way.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635070</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31636330</id>
	<title>Depends on the genetics of the trait/disease</title>
	<author>izomiac</author>
	<datestamp>1269620760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Fixing single gene defects, like color blindness, is like changing a bad capacitor.  Big deal.  A keyboard with a broken button isn't really valuable* to anyone (unless that broken key is caps lock and it's a gift).<br> <br>
Changing polygenic traits like height, IQ, sexual orientation, or predisposition to obesity is completely different.  Those traits are a result of many genes interacting.  Changing them would be like rewiring the whole circuit.  Besides being technologically infeasible, the ethical issues apply particularly strongly here.
<br> <br>
<i>* I mean this as in the "trait" doesn't really enrich the person who has it, not that the person is worthless.  I suppose color blind people see the world differently, but if they want this procedure then I see no reason to deny it to them.</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>Fixing single gene defects , like color blindness , is like changing a bad capacitor .
Big deal .
A keyboard with a broken button is n't really valuable * to anyone ( unless that broken key is caps lock and it 's a gift ) .
Changing polygenic traits like height , IQ , sexual orientation , or predisposition to obesity is completely different .
Those traits are a result of many genes interacting .
Changing them would be like rewiring the whole circuit .
Besides being technologically infeasible , the ethical issues apply particularly strongly here .
* I mean this as in the " trait " does n't really enrich the person who has it , not that the person is worthless .
I suppose color blind people see the world differently , but if they want this procedure then I see no reason to deny it to them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Fixing single gene defects, like color blindness, is like changing a bad capacitor.
Big deal.
A keyboard with a broken button isn't really valuable* to anyone (unless that broken key is caps lock and it's a gift).
Changing polygenic traits like height, IQ, sexual orientation, or predisposition to obesity is completely different.
Those traits are a result of many genes interacting.
Changing them would be like rewiring the whole circuit.
Besides being technologically infeasible, the ethical issues apply particularly strongly here.
* I mean this as in the "trait" doesn't really enrich the person who has it, not that the person is worthless.
I suppose color blind people see the world differently, but if they want this procedure then I see no reason to deny it to them.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635234</id>
	<title>silly question</title>
	<author>slew</author>
	<datestamp>1269613500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://hplusmagazine.com/articles/bio/monkey-see-or-one-man\%E2\%80\%99s-fix-another\%E2\%80\%99s-enhancement" title="hplusmagazine.com">better link</a> [hplusmagazine.com]</p><p>Would curing a slow-growing cancer or rheumatoid arthritis morally wrong?<br>How about giving someone a pair of glasses, or contacts or perhaps laser-eye surgery?<br>How about restoring hearing to a deaf person (or simply the ability to hear about 20KHz again)?<br>How about vaccinating against rubella or meningitis to prevent deafness?<br>Or vaccinating people succeptible to polio or small pox?<br>Well one could argue that many of these are approximatly the same level of intervention as curing color blindness.</p><p>The article generally assert that if DNA is some magic new science to be wary of because someone else's "fix" can be another person's "enhancement" as if this is some sort of new issue.  Sadly it is not.  HGH is a recent example of something not-dna related.  HGH is medically useful to accelerate the development of children that have development deficiencies and are used by some atheletes to gain an enhancement.  Some people are taking ritalin and adderall to help with hyperactivity, but others to get better SAT scores.  An older example might be taking antibiotics or steroids.</p><p>DNA retro-technology isn't moral or immoral, it's just a new technology like many others that spun out of scientific research.  The people who apply the technology are either moral or immoral (or amoral) about it.  Sadly there are some of each type that apply any technological advance.  I guess the question at least keeps bioethicist employed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>better link [ hplusmagazine.com ] Would curing a slow-growing cancer or rheumatoid arthritis morally wrong ? How about giving someone a pair of glasses , or contacts or perhaps laser-eye surgery ? How about restoring hearing to a deaf person ( or simply the ability to hear about 20KHz again ) ? How about vaccinating against rubella or meningitis to prevent deafness ? Or vaccinating people succeptible to polio or small pox ? Well one could argue that many of these are approximatly the same level of intervention as curing color blindness.The article generally assert that if DNA is some magic new science to be wary of because someone else 's " fix " can be another person 's " enhancement " as if this is some sort of new issue .
Sadly it is not .
HGH is a recent example of something not-dna related .
HGH is medically useful to accelerate the development of children that have development deficiencies and are used by some atheletes to gain an enhancement .
Some people are taking ritalin and adderall to help with hyperactivity , but others to get better SAT scores .
An older example might be taking antibiotics or steroids.DNA retro-technology is n't moral or immoral , it 's just a new technology like many others that spun out of scientific research .
The people who apply the technology are either moral or immoral ( or amoral ) about it .
Sadly there are some of each type that apply any technological advance .
I guess the question at least keeps bioethicist employed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>better link [hplusmagazine.com]Would curing a slow-growing cancer or rheumatoid arthritis morally wrong?How about giving someone a pair of glasses, or contacts or perhaps laser-eye surgery?How about restoring hearing to a deaf person (or simply the ability to hear about 20KHz again)?How about vaccinating against rubella or meningitis to prevent deafness?Or vaccinating people succeptible to polio or small pox?Well one could argue that many of these are approximatly the same level of intervention as curing color blindness.The article generally assert that if DNA is some magic new science to be wary of because someone else's "fix" can be another person's "enhancement" as if this is some sort of new issue.
Sadly it is not.
HGH is a recent example of something not-dna related.
HGH is medically useful to accelerate the development of children that have development deficiencies and are used by some atheletes to gain an enhancement.
Some people are taking ritalin and adderall to help with hyperactivity, but others to get better SAT scores.
An older example might be taking antibiotics or steroids.DNA retro-technology isn't moral or immoral, it's just a new technology like many others that spun out of scientific research.
The people who apply the technology are either moral or immoral (or amoral) about it.
Sadly there are some of each type that apply any technological advance.
I guess the question at least keeps bioethicist employed.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635450</id>
	<title>Re:as an extreme red-green colorblind person...</title>
	<author>girlintraining</author>
	<datestamp>1269614820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I say "fuck you" to your moral objection.</p> </div><p>Funny, that's how they responded to freeing the slaves, women's sufferage, and the Prohibition, and those are just the things I can quote out of the Constitution.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I say " fuck you " to your moral objection .
Funny , that 's how they responded to freeing the slaves , women 's sufferage , and the Prohibition , and those are just the things I can quote out of the Constitution .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I say "fuck you" to your moral objection.
Funny, that's how they responded to freeing the slaves, women's sufferage, and the Prohibition, and those are just the things I can quote out of the Constitution.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635070</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31652680</id>
	<title>Wringing of hands</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269790440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Stupid people have to have something to worry about. I think she has been watching too much Star Trek. At the college To me it is hardly a moral nor ethical question.  Not treating them is like the arguments we used to hear about not giving someone with a broken arm or suffering from something like kidney stones some narcotics. It's unethical and morally bankrupt. She should admit her error.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Stupid people have to have something to worry about .
I think she has been watching too much Star Trek .
At the college To me it is hardly a moral nor ethical question .
Not treating them is like the arguments we used to hear about not giving someone with a broken arm or suffering from something like kidney stones some narcotics .
It 's unethical and morally bankrupt .
She should admit her error .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Stupid people have to have something to worry about.
I think she has been watching too much Star Trek.
At the college To me it is hardly a moral nor ethical question.
Not treating them is like the arguments we used to hear about not giving someone with a broken arm or suffering from something like kidney stones some narcotics.
It's unethical and morally bankrupt.
She should admit her error.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635144</id>
	<title>Re:The Qualia beast raises its head again</title>
	<author>pydev</author>
	<datestamp>1269612960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>It's reasonable to produce scientific measurements of this and that. But what colours (or saturation) they *map* to inside the brain is another matter.</i></p><p>That can be determined experimentally as well, both by sticking electrodes into brains, and by performing clever experiments.</p><p><i>For example, some creatures are monochromats, which means they can probably only see one colour.</i></p><p>No, it doesn't mean "probably", it means they can actually only see one color.</p><p><i>But what that colour actually is, is anyone's guess.</i></p><p>Just lower the lights until your night vision kicks in.  Voila, you have monochromatic vision too.</p><p><i>Apparently, some people have four colour cones instead of three. Do they see a new colour competely outside our range, or just have extra 'depth' to distinguish our current range more easily?</i></p><p>That's not a question of qualia; it's easy to determine experimentally.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's reasonable to produce scientific measurements of this and that .
But what colours ( or saturation ) they * map * to inside the brain is another matter.That can be determined experimentally as well , both by sticking electrodes into brains , and by performing clever experiments.For example , some creatures are monochromats , which means they can probably only see one colour.No , it does n't mean " probably " , it means they can actually only see one color.But what that colour actually is , is anyone 's guess.Just lower the lights until your night vision kicks in .
Voila , you have monochromatic vision too.Apparently , some people have four colour cones instead of three .
Do they see a new colour competely outside our range , or just have extra 'depth ' to distinguish our current range more easily ? That 's not a question of qualia ; it 's easy to determine experimentally .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's reasonable to produce scientific measurements of this and that.
But what colours (or saturation) they *map* to inside the brain is another matter.That can be determined experimentally as well, both by sticking electrodes into brains, and by performing clever experiments.For example, some creatures are monochromats, which means they can probably only see one colour.No, it doesn't mean "probably", it means they can actually only see one color.But what that colour actually is, is anyone's guess.Just lower the lights until your night vision kicks in.
Voila, you have monochromatic vision too.Apparently, some people have four colour cones instead of three.
Do they see a new colour competely outside our range, or just have extra 'depth' to distinguish our current range more easily?That's not a question of qualia; it's easy to determine experimentally.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31634968</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31638486</id>
	<title>I am colorblind, and...</title>
	<author>Hitto</author>
	<datestamp>1269694140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If they could just change the red/green LEDs to red/something-that-isn't-even-close-to-being-mistaken-for-the-same-fucking-color-by-us-daltonians LEDs, I wouldn't need a cure. You know, red/blue would work. That is the ONLY thing I resent in everyday life. Assholes. Instead they wanna prick my eye with a needle, fuck that. I don't care about being a pilot, or a chemist.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If they could just change the red/green LEDs to red/something-that-is n't-even-close-to-being-mistaken-for-the-same-fucking-color-by-us-daltonians LEDs , I would n't need a cure .
You know , red/blue would work .
That is the ONLY thing I resent in everyday life .
Assholes. Instead they wan na prick my eye with a needle , fuck that .
I do n't care about being a pilot , or a chemist .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If they could just change the red/green LEDs to red/something-that-isn't-even-close-to-being-mistaken-for-the-same-fucking-color-by-us-daltonians LEDs, I wouldn't need a cure.
You know, red/blue would work.
That is the ONLY thing I resent in everyday life.
Assholes. Instead they wanna prick my eye with a needle, fuck that.
I don't care about being a pilot, or a chemist.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635828</id>
	<title>I think the same thing...</title>
	<author>Pitr</author>
	<datestamp>1269616980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... of this article as I did of an episode of a TV show (ER or some similar medical show I only caught part of an episode of) where one of the main characters had a deaf child and the "specialist" they were recommended to for potential treatment asked them to consider the wonderful "gift" she had, or something like that.  Like I said, I only caught part of the show, so if anyone knows the show/episode I'm talking about and has a clearer idea of what they were trying to say, feel free to chip in.</p><p>As for what exactly I think of that suggestion, and this one; It's really dumb, and likely an offensive concept to anyone who feels held back by their disability.  Go "morally protest" something important and stop telling people it's questionable to want to be able to perform at a "normal" level.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... of this article as I did of an episode of a TV show ( ER or some similar medical show I only caught part of an episode of ) where one of the main characters had a deaf child and the " specialist " they were recommended to for potential treatment asked them to consider the wonderful " gift " she had , or something like that .
Like I said , I only caught part of the show , so if anyone knows the show/episode I 'm talking about and has a clearer idea of what they were trying to say , feel free to chip in.As for what exactly I think of that suggestion , and this one ; It 's really dumb , and likely an offensive concept to anyone who feels held back by their disability .
Go " morally protest " something important and stop telling people it 's questionable to want to be able to perform at a " normal " level .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... of this article as I did of an episode of a TV show (ER or some similar medical show I only caught part of an episode of) where one of the main characters had a deaf child and the "specialist" they were recommended to for potential treatment asked them to consider the wonderful "gift" she had, or something like that.
Like I said, I only caught part of the show, so if anyone knows the show/episode I'm talking about and has a clearer idea of what they were trying to say, feel free to chip in.As for what exactly I think of that suggestion, and this one; It's really dumb, and likely an offensive concept to anyone who feels held back by their disability.
Go "morally protest" something important and stop telling people it's questionable to want to be able to perform at a "normal" level.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635838</id>
	<title>Re:Oh give me a BREAK!</title>
	<author>myowntrueself</author>
	<datestamp>1269617100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ok how about this.</p><p>The whole potential human genome is a search space.</p><p>By removing the gene for colorblindness we could remove access to potentially valuable volumes of the search space.</p><p>Suppose that the gene for colorblindness turned out to be connected with a gene for telepathy<br>such that if we remove colorblindness from the human genome we effectively rule out any possibility of evolving telepathy? (ASSUMING one thinks of telepathy as a potential valuable thing for humans to acquire; lets not get sidetracked by that).</p><p>Just an arbitrary example of the way in which we could exclude possibilities from future generations.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ok how about this.The whole potential human genome is a search space.By removing the gene for colorblindness we could remove access to potentially valuable volumes of the search space.Suppose that the gene for colorblindness turned out to be connected with a gene for telepathysuch that if we remove colorblindness from the human genome we effectively rule out any possibility of evolving telepathy ?
( ASSUMING one thinks of telepathy as a potential valuable thing for humans to acquire ; lets not get sidetracked by that ) .Just an arbitrary example of the way in which we could exclude possibilities from future generations .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ok how about this.The whole potential human genome is a search space.By removing the gene for colorblindness we could remove access to potentially valuable volumes of the search space.Suppose that the gene for colorblindness turned out to be connected with a gene for telepathysuch that if we remove colorblindness from the human genome we effectively rule out any possibility of evolving telepathy?
(ASSUMING one thinks of telepathy as a potential valuable thing for humans to acquire; lets not get sidetracked by that).Just an arbitrary example of the way in which we could exclude possibilities from future generations.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635056</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31636046</id>
	<title>Re:What's wrong with normal?</title>
	<author>hedwards</author>
	<datestamp>1269618660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That's not really the same things. If you wear glasses you can take them off, and if you choose to get surgery, you are presumably returning your eyesight to the state it was originally. Curing color blindness though, is different. You're doing something that changes the way the eyes function, in most cases from the way they did originally. And you're doing it primarily for the purpose of making color blind people like color sighted people.<br> <br>

It's not wrong because being able to see colors is wrong. It's wrong because people are changing in ways that they can't really comprehend and there's a high risk of people doing so without really considering whether or not it's worthwhile. A better solution would be to make sure signs are painted in proper colors and giving people augmented reality gear when it becomes available.<br> <br>

I've gone somewhat color blind in one eye in recent years, and it's a very different view of things, one side is warmer and the other side is cooler. One side is decidedly easier to pass the color blindness test and the other I barely pass with. The world looks different, but not necessarily better with full color vision.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's not really the same things .
If you wear glasses you can take them off , and if you choose to get surgery , you are presumably returning your eyesight to the state it was originally .
Curing color blindness though , is different .
You 're doing something that changes the way the eyes function , in most cases from the way they did originally .
And you 're doing it primarily for the purpose of making color blind people like color sighted people .
It 's not wrong because being able to see colors is wrong .
It 's wrong because people are changing in ways that they ca n't really comprehend and there 's a high risk of people doing so without really considering whether or not it 's worthwhile .
A better solution would be to make sure signs are painted in proper colors and giving people augmented reality gear when it becomes available .
I 've gone somewhat color blind in one eye in recent years , and it 's a very different view of things , one side is warmer and the other side is cooler .
One side is decidedly easier to pass the color blindness test and the other I barely pass with .
The world looks different , but not necessarily better with full color vision .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's not really the same things.
If you wear glasses you can take them off, and if you choose to get surgery, you are presumably returning your eyesight to the state it was originally.
Curing color blindness though, is different.
You're doing something that changes the way the eyes function, in most cases from the way they did originally.
And you're doing it primarily for the purpose of making color blind people like color sighted people.
It's not wrong because being able to see colors is wrong.
It's wrong because people are changing in ways that they can't really comprehend and there's a high risk of people doing so without really considering whether or not it's worthwhile.
A better solution would be to make sure signs are painted in proper colors and giving people augmented reality gear when it becomes available.
I've gone somewhat color blind in one eye in recent years, and it's a very different view of things, one side is warmer and the other side is cooler.
One side is decidedly easier to pass the color blindness test and the other I barely pass with.
The world looks different, but not necessarily better with full color vision.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31634974</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31655080</id>
	<title>Re:The Qualia beast raises its head again</title>
	<author>RivenAleem</author>
	<datestamp>1269863880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> Mainly this manifests in differences in discrimination ability between colors as well as disagreement about what constitutes a "color match" between observers that are getting different information.</p></div><p>So this is why girls can tell when those shoes don't go with that handbag?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Mainly this manifests in differences in discrimination ability between colors as well as disagreement about what constitutes a " color match " between observers that are getting different information.So this is why girls can tell when those shoes do n't go with that handbag ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Mainly this manifests in differences in discrimination ability between colors as well as disagreement about what constitutes a "color match" between observers that are getting different information.So this is why girls can tell when those shoes don't go with that handbag?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635768</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635506</id>
	<title>Re:as an extreme red-green colorblind person...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269615120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I am also colourblind, and I say "fuck you" to your assertion. That the world I see has a little less green in it than the world others see (similar to 6\% of the male populace) doesn't mean I have any problems in my day-to-day life. There is absolutely nothing I have encountered in life so far that required me to have different vision than what I have at the moment. Admittedly, when I choose clothing for myself, some of the choices I may make could be not quite so aesthetically pleasing to the rest of the world, and any artistic interpretations of the world that I make will certainly look a little strange to others, but none of those "issues" particularly affect my life.</p><p>I say we certainly give people the option to "Cure" their atypical vision, just as we do for people with myopia and cataracts, but to call it a "disability" is going a little too far, IMHO.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I am also colourblind , and I say " fuck you " to your assertion .
That the world I see has a little less green in it than the world others see ( similar to 6 \ % of the male populace ) does n't mean I have any problems in my day-to-day life .
There is absolutely nothing I have encountered in life so far that required me to have different vision than what I have at the moment .
Admittedly , when I choose clothing for myself , some of the choices I may make could be not quite so aesthetically pleasing to the rest of the world , and any artistic interpretations of the world that I make will certainly look a little strange to others , but none of those " issues " particularly affect my life.I say we certainly give people the option to " Cure " their atypical vision , just as we do for people with myopia and cataracts , but to call it a " disability " is going a little too far , IMHO .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am also colourblind, and I say "fuck you" to your assertion.
That the world I see has a little less green in it than the world others see (similar to 6\% of the male populace) doesn't mean I have any problems in my day-to-day life.
There is absolutely nothing I have encountered in life so far that required me to have different vision than what I have at the moment.
Admittedly, when I choose clothing for myself, some of the choices I may make could be not quite so aesthetically pleasing to the rest of the world, and any artistic interpretations of the world that I make will certainly look a little strange to others, but none of those "issues" particularly affect my life.I say we certainly give people the option to "Cure" their atypical vision, just as we do for people with myopia and cataracts, but to call it a "disability" is going a little too far, IMHO.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635070</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31663598</id>
	<title>Re:Sometimes the color blind can be funny.</title>
	<author>darenw</author>
	<datestamp>1269863700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How is it that he was old enough to own a car and all, but not know he was colorblind?  Don't the colorblind usually know about it from a young age?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How is it that he was old enough to own a car and all , but not know he was colorblind ?
Do n't the colorblind usually know about it from a young age ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How is it that he was old enough to own a car and all, but not know he was colorblind?
Don't the colorblind usually know about it from a young age?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635858</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635106</id>
	<title>slashdot would look kinda strange ...</title>
	<author>jobst</author>
	<datestamp>1269612780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>slashdot would look kinda strange, wouldn't it?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>slashdot would look kinda strange , would n't it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>slashdot would look kinda strange, wouldn't it?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31634950</id>
	<title>Consenting adults</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269612000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm a consenting adult.<br><br>If I want to put a drug into my body, it's my right.  If I want to put a penis into me, it's my right.  If I want to put my penis into something, it's my right.<br><br>If I want my DNA changed, then it's my right.  Anyone who says otherwise is a prohibitionist and a statist, just like people who support our government locking up consenting adults for other victimless acts.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm a consenting adult.If I want to put a drug into my body , it 's my right .
If I want to put a penis into me , it 's my right .
If I want to put my penis into something , it 's my right.If I want my DNA changed , then it 's my right .
Anyone who says otherwise is a prohibitionist and a statist , just like people who support our government locking up consenting adults for other victimless acts .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm a consenting adult.If I want to put a drug into my body, it's my right.
If I want to put a penis into me, it's my right.
If I want to put my penis into something, it's my right.If I want my DNA changed, then it's my right.
Anyone who says otherwise is a prohibitionist and a statist, just like people who support our government locking up consenting adults for other victimless acts.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31636472</id>
	<title>Re:Oh give me a BREAK!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269621960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Two problems with that thought:<br>1) There isn't a 'gene for colorblindness'. It's actually the lack of a specific gene on the X chromosome that causes it.<br>2) This fix just inserts the missing gene, it doesn't delete or overwrite anything that's already there.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Two problems with that thought : 1 ) There is n't a 'gene for colorblindness' .
It 's actually the lack of a specific gene on the X chromosome that causes it.2 ) This fix just inserts the missing gene , it does n't delete or overwrite anything that 's already there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Two problems with that thought:1) There isn't a 'gene for colorblindness'.
It's actually the lack of a specific gene on the X chromosome that causes it.2) This fix just inserts the missing gene, it doesn't delete or overwrite anything that's already there.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635838</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31638740</id>
	<title>morally wrong, wtf?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269697980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I am colourblind (I do see colours, but have difficulty disguingishing) and I read about these monkeys about a year ago.<br>I want this treatment!<br>So go f*k yourself Moria Gunn, obviously, you're not colourblind.<br>It is morally wrong to cure your breast cancer though. Bitch!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I am colourblind ( I do see colours , but have difficulty disguingishing ) and I read about these monkeys about a year ago.I want this treatment ! So go f * k yourself Moria Gunn , obviously , you 're not colourblind.It is morally wrong to cure your breast cancer though .
Bitch !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am colourblind (I do see colours, but have difficulty disguingishing) and I read about these monkeys about a year ago.I want this treatment!So go f*k yourself Moria Gunn, obviously, you're not colourblind.It is morally wrong to cure your breast cancer though.
Bitch!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31641400</id>
	<title>Drop-jawwed... WHAT?</title>
	<author>drmitch</author>
	<datestamp>1269718020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>What a stupid argument. "Is it wrong to help someone that was born with a defect that inhibits their abilities in the real world?" I suppose giving prothetic legs to amputees is morally wrong too.</htmltext>
<tokenext>What a stupid argument .
" Is it wrong to help someone that was born with a defect that inhibits their abilities in the real world ?
" I suppose giving prothetic legs to amputees is morally wrong too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What a stupid argument.
"Is it wrong to help someone that was born with a defect that inhibits their abilities in the real world?
" I suppose giving prothetic legs to amputees is morally wrong too.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31636210</id>
	<title>I fail to see the conflict</title>
	<author>OrangeTide</author>
	<datestamp>1269619860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If a patient wishes to have the same number of senses as his neighbor, then it seems perfectly reasonable to offer a solution.</p><p>Being unable to sense the difference between some colors is the lack of a sense. But it also must be up to the individual if they would receive the treatment or not.</p><p>This is different than having yourself modified to have super strength or unnatural infravision, because it is something outside typical (or in some cases ANY) human abilities. I'm not saying I'm for or against enhancements beyond what nature provides, I'd just like to make sure we can agree that it is a completely different topic of discussion. Maybe it's a matter of degrees, but asking for a piece of birthday cake when everyone else got one is generally considered reasonable. Asking for TWO pieces of cake where others only received one is considered greedy. Cultural bias perhaps, but it is a viewpoint that is common over many human cultures (if not all of them)</p><p>Don't be greedy with your genetic modifications.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If a patient wishes to have the same number of senses as his neighbor , then it seems perfectly reasonable to offer a solution.Being unable to sense the difference between some colors is the lack of a sense .
But it also must be up to the individual if they would receive the treatment or not.This is different than having yourself modified to have super strength or unnatural infravision , because it is something outside typical ( or in some cases ANY ) human abilities .
I 'm not saying I 'm for or against enhancements beyond what nature provides , I 'd just like to make sure we can agree that it is a completely different topic of discussion .
Maybe it 's a matter of degrees , but asking for a piece of birthday cake when everyone else got one is generally considered reasonable .
Asking for TWO pieces of cake where others only received one is considered greedy .
Cultural bias perhaps , but it is a viewpoint that is common over many human cultures ( if not all of them ) Do n't be greedy with your genetic modifications .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If a patient wishes to have the same number of senses as his neighbor, then it seems perfectly reasonable to offer a solution.Being unable to sense the difference between some colors is the lack of a sense.
But it also must be up to the individual if they would receive the treatment or not.This is different than having yourself modified to have super strength or unnatural infravision, because it is something outside typical (or in some cases ANY) human abilities.
I'm not saying I'm for or against enhancements beyond what nature provides, I'd just like to make sure we can agree that it is a completely different topic of discussion.
Maybe it's a matter of degrees, but asking for a piece of birthday cake when everyone else got one is generally considered reasonable.
Asking for TWO pieces of cake where others only received one is considered greedy.
Cultural bias perhaps, but it is a viewpoint that is common over many human cultures (if not all of them)Don't be greedy with your genetic modifications.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31636742</id>
	<title>Re:Oh give me a BREAK!</title>
	<author>madpansy</author>
	<datestamp>1269624420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Don't worry, there's no foreseeable cure for poverty, so there will be plenty of people who can't afford to remove colorblindness.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't worry , there 's no foreseeable cure for poverty , so there will be plenty of people who ca n't afford to remove colorblindness .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't worry, there's no foreseeable cure for poverty, so there will be plenty of people who can't afford to remove colorblindness.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635838</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635764</id>
	<title>Re:As noted by others</title>
	<author>cpghost</author>
	<datestamp>1269616560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So, basically, you want a (biological?) <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VISOR#VISOR" title="wikipedia.org">VISOR</a> [wikipedia.org].</htmltext>
<tokenext>So , basically , you want a ( biological ?
) VISOR [ wikipedia.org ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, basically, you want a (biological?
) VISOR [wikipedia.org].</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635086</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31636312</id>
	<title>Color "blindness" also a survival advantage</title>
	<author>TaleSpinner</author>
	<datestamp>1269620580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So-called color "blind" men have frequently been shown to have advantages in seeing through camouflage in a natural environment - a useful trait for hunting.  Like sickle-cell anemia and attention "deficit disorder", these "disabilities" turn out to have survival advantages for the species.  In sickle-cell just one copy of the gene makes the owner more resistant to malaria, and so is a net win for species survival even though those who inherit two of them die.  Attention "deficit disorder" - a short attention span and high distractability - makes it possible to be more aware of <i>everything</i> going on in the environment around you - like the prey lurking under a bush, the odor of a big cat, or that (possibly fatally-infected) fly landing on you, all things that a highly focused individual might miss in concentrating on chipping his flint.  Many such traits are still in the gene pool for a reason.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So-called color " blind " men have frequently been shown to have advantages in seeing through camouflage in a natural environment - a useful trait for hunting .
Like sickle-cell anemia and attention " deficit disorder " , these " disabilities " turn out to have survival advantages for the species .
In sickle-cell just one copy of the gene makes the owner more resistant to malaria , and so is a net win for species survival even though those who inherit two of them die .
Attention " deficit disorder " - a short attention span and high distractability - makes it possible to be more aware of everything going on in the environment around you - like the prey lurking under a bush , the odor of a big cat , or that ( possibly fatally-infected ) fly landing on you , all things that a highly focused individual might miss in concentrating on chipping his flint .
Many such traits are still in the gene pool for a reason .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So-called color "blind" men have frequently been shown to have advantages in seeing through camouflage in a natural environment - a useful trait for hunting.
Like sickle-cell anemia and attention "deficit disorder", these "disabilities" turn out to have survival advantages for the species.
In sickle-cell just one copy of the gene makes the owner more resistant to malaria, and so is a net win for species survival even though those who inherit two of them die.
Attention "deficit disorder" - a short attention span and high distractability - makes it possible to be more aware of everything going on in the environment around you - like the prey lurking under a bush, the odor of a big cat, or that (possibly fatally-infected) fly landing on you, all things that a highly focused individual might miss in concentrating on chipping his flint.
Many such traits are still in the gene pool for a reason.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_0010246_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31634968
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635714
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_0010246_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635828
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31640460
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_0010246_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635086
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31640604
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_0010246_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31634968
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635768
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31655080
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_0010246_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635056
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31636830
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_0010246_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635022
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635994
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_0010246_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635070
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31636946
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_0010246_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31634968
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31636440
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_0010246_67</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31634950
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635424
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_0010246_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635056
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635838
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31636472
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_0010246_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635086
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635764
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_0010246_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31634940
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635638
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31637048
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_0010246_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31634968
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31660268
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_0010246_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635056
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635838
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31637368
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_0010246_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31634942
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635040
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_0010246_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635070
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31640860
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_0010246_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635134
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31636366
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_0010246_66</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31634950
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31646652
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_0010246_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31636466
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31639106
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_0010246_65</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635022
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31637374
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_0010246_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31634968
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635820
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_0010246_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635070
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31638778
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_0010246_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31634968
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31636392
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_0010246_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635056
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635532
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_0010246_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31634942
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31648964
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_0010246_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635106
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635710
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_0010246_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31634968
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31636470
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_0010246_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31634940
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635638
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31638962
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_0010246_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31636466
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31639672
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_0010246_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31634968
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635144
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635906
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_0010246_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635134
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31638240
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_0010246_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31634968
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31639812
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_0010246_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31634940
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635638
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31637016
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_0010246_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31634974
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31637446
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_0010246_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635056
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635790
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_0010246_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635858
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31663598
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_0010246_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635070
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635782
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_0010246_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635134
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31639886
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_0010246_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635022
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31661874
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_0010246_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635022
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31636314
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_0010246_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635234
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31645184
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_0010246_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635070
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635708
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_0010246_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635070
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635506
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_0010246_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31634942
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31636922
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_0010246_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635070
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635490
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31636154
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_0010246_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31634940
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635638
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31637296
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_0010246_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635134
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31639496
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_0010246_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635022
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635744
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_0010246_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31634940
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31637324
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_0010246_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635134
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635886
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31637316
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_0010246_68</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635134
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31646188
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_0010246_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635070
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31639468
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_0010246_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31634968
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635144
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31643330
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_0010246_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635022
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635554
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_0010246_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635070
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31637070
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_0010246_64</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31634968
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31637578
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_0010246_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635134
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31638302
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_0010246_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635056
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635838
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31638498
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_0010246_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635070
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635450
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31637628
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_0010246_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635056
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635838
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31636742
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_0010246_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635054
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31641198
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_0010246_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31634968
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635144
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635518
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_0010246_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31634974
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31636046
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_0010246_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31634942
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31636404
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_0010246_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31634942
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31636016
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_0010246_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31634942
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635494
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_0010246_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31634942
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31639360
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_0010246_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635070
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635490
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635856
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_0010246_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635956
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31643556
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_27_0010246.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31634940
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635638
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31638962
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31637296
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31637048
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31637016
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31637324
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_27_0010246.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635828
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31640460
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_27_0010246.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31636466
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31639106
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31639672
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_27_0010246.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31636102
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_27_0010246.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31643128
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_27_0010246.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635858
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31663598
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_27_0010246.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31640236
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_27_0010246.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31634942
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31639360
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31636404
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31636016
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31636922
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635494
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31648964
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635040
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_27_0010246.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635054
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31641198
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_27_0010246.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635850
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_27_0010246.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31634866
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_27_0010246.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31636656
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_27_0010246.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31636158
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_27_0010246.26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635106
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635710
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_27_0010246.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635070
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31638778
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31636946
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635450
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31637628
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635490
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31636154
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635856
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635506
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31637070
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635708
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31640860
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31639468
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635782
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_27_0010246.24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31634968
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31637578
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635714
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635820
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31639812
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31636470
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31660268
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635144
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635518
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635906
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31643330
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635768
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31655080
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31636392
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31636440
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_27_0010246.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635022
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31636314
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31637374
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635994
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635554
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635744
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31661874
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_27_0010246.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31634950
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31646652
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635424
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_27_0010246.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635086
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31640604
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635764
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_27_0010246.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635056
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635532
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635790
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31636830
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635838
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31636472
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31636742
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31638498
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31637368
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_27_0010246.25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31636312
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_27_0010246.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635234
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31645184
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_27_0010246.23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635134
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31638302
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31646188
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31639886
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635886
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31637316
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31639496
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31638240
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31636366
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_27_0010246.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31636586
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_27_0010246.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31635956
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31643556
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_27_0010246.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31637504
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_27_0010246.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31634974
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31636046
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_0010246.31637446
</commentlist>
</conversation>
