1. I think that compassion plays a role in the design of ethical standards for biogenetics and genetic manipulation, it may not be a huge role but it is in peoples minds and they take everything into  consideration when making these rules. Compassion plays a role because when they are making these ethical rules they are looking at all the sides. They are looking to see if there will be long term effects and if there are would it be right to go forward. I wouldn’t say that because the Dalai Lama is a spiritual leader that it enhanced or detracted from his perspective that he was showing us. There were times that I didn’t agree with what he said because I am of a different religion than he is. There was a part where he was talking about cloning and he said “it may be an identical body, but there will be two different consciousnesses. They will still die.” I don’t really think this is totally true and this is where his spiritual leader side comes in so I can’t take it to heart. There was another time when he said ” we must begin by putting faith in the basic goodness of human nature,” I see where he is coming from with this that we all need to come together to help save our planet but there are always going to be people that don’t agree with each other and it’s more of a dream that everyone is going to get along to help the planet .I do think that there is room for religion in science because there are times where someone gets suddenly better with no explanation, doctors can’t figure it out they just got better so there is that religious part where something else intervened. I also think that there is some room for science in religion because lets say that your farm isn’t getting enough water and there’s a drought but you aren’t doing anything to help this besides praying that the water will come, or even if you’re sick an all you’re doing is praying. With the technology we have today you can find someone to help in both cases, a doctor who will help you or even another high-tech farmer. You can’t only rely on religion. Sometimes science and religion need a balance.
2. Some of the ethical responsibilities that I would discuss with this team is what do they want to achieve from doing this, why are they doing this? What are the outcomes/symptoms of taking this pill? How much money will this cost? I’d ask this because if this can determine whether someone gets this pill or not as well as if they are only doing this for the money then they shouldn’t make this. Is this a cure? Are there genetic defects that can happen, you are trying to alter their genetic code. Are there long term effects? How do you decide who should get the pill? I’d ask many of these questions because you have to think of their reasons for making the pill. Are there risks to this pill and if there are should you give it to people until you get the correct formula? This is a big question because if you are giving someone something that’ll harm people but will benefit others should you really be giving this pill.
3. I would say that I agree with this list but that there needs to be more than just three ethical principles. There is a lot more going on than just thinking about compassion. I would add that we need to think of why and who you are doing this for, because if you are making/doing something for your benefit then you should be doing that but if you are trying to help eradicate a deadly disease then that is a better reason. I would change the way he words ” recognition of the preciousness of life,” because life is precious but will this procedure help this life or do more harm. So I would say recognize the rights of the person while having their best interest in mind. I would say that the list that the Dalia Lama had wouldn’t be comprehensive enough to address the ethical dilemma the ethical standards in science and research because it’s to focused on compassion and the religious side of life. I do believe that we need to take into consideration the compassion and life when thinking of ethical dilemmas but we also need to think of that person’s decisions, what they want. We also need to think about doing no harm and doing good to/for the person. When the DL talks about “the manipulation of genes for the creation of children with enhanced characteristics” he goes into how people are going to feel inferior to those who had better characteristics but I see it as helping the child if they had a predisposition to a disease. When doing procedures like these, changing characteristics the scientists is taking into consideration the effect that this’ll have on the child not the way the DL is think, that this child is going to make others feel bad because it got better genes. The DL is looking at the life and soul of the child while the doctor is looking at the whole person and how to make them better.