Seems like somewhat of a cold notion to consider that these are some of the first words the doctor delivering your baby might speak after his birth. However, with the ever growing technology and genetic know-how we see in the news today, it is certainly likely to assume that someday we will all be reduced to one national number. It may be something to chuckle about now, but to ignore the potential consequences of such a reality would be equivalent to that of sticking your head in a microwave. Stupid.

Genetics and society are simply a twosome we cannot ignore. We are now actually able to extract DNA from a person and "file" it, in order to be used or viewed at a later date. Meaning, we can literally go into somebody's body, take something out of him or her, and put it in a Rolodex. This being done in an effort to maintain anything from law enforcement databases to banking transactions. As insensitive as it is, that it is, is something that is certainly possible. The question to be asked; does that make it right?

Would establishing a National Database of genetic DNA fingerprints, samples of genes who belonged t

There are too many questions left unanswered to establish a database with so much important and private information. With over 800,000 DNA fingerprints already existing in the hands of god knows whom, is it logical to think maybe we might be on some list somewhere and not even know it? Yes. Now a database such as this would cause controversy everywhere from religion to politics. It would serve as a crutch for law enforcement's continued let downs, a so called "re-vamp" to the ever so perfect Bush administration and an overall threat to the Anthrax scared Americans. We are simply not ready. We need to accept this and work hard to further research something that someday will help us convict murders and rapists and virtually make the world a better place, until then, this idea is just another plot for a Spielberg movie. It's not a reality, and it shouldn't be yet.

A man named Robert Flowers was wrongfully accused with a rape of a young woman, when his brother's DNA was mistakenly thought to be his. He was rendered innocent and is now in a pending lawsuit with high court. "DNA technology does not mean citizens are guilty until proven innocent," said C. Thomas Caskey of head of Harvard genetics department.

However, this is purely not true. As of now there is no federal department regulating or overseeing DNA genetic fingerprinting. We cannot take advantage of a newfound technology which we have not even began to fully understand and create a factory to process peoples lives with it.

Once a law is passed requiring citizens to provide a DNA fingerprint, how will it be paid for? Will regular citizens pay for it all or perhaps large corporations in attempt to control more of our lives. How will it be collected? Will our children be taken to the nurse's office at school, will our employers bring people in? Will the collection cost money? Where will the DNA go? "DNA changes overtime," says Adam Colle a genetic researcher from t

Some common words found in the essay are:
Barry Sheck, Adam Colle, Harvard University, National Database, Thomas Caskey, Stupid Genetics, Federal Database, Robert Flowers, , Eric Lander, dna match, dna fingerprint, court dna, agents dna, fbi agents, hard evidence, genetic fingerprint, dna fingerprinting, dna hardly, sample dna,
Approximate Word count = 1306
Approximate Pages = 5 (250 words per page double spaced)