Professor Michael J. Sandel has treated us to an elegant argument against efforts by athletes to use medicine to "enhance" their bodies or by parents, in effect, to genetically engineer their children. I cannot agree with him more that "playing God" (my phrase, not his) in these ways is fundamentally an exercise in hubris, a rejection of the gifts that we have been given. I cannot improve on Professor Sandel's presentation of his argument. Unlike some Supreme Court Justices, I know that I am not a philosopher. Having said that, one of the joys of being a law professor is that, when important philosophical issues come up (such as the acceptability of abortion, cloning, or physician-assisted suicide), those philosophical issues almost invariably are left to the legal system to resolve. So, lawyers who are not competent by training to address broad philosophical issues, such as "what is it to be human?" and "when does life begin?," do so anyway. I proceed in the same vein here today, mindful of my professional incompetence in the area that I address but utterly undeterred by that limitation.