Rebutal to Tony's post on DNA alteration

       I decided to make a rebutal on Tony's thoughts about DNA altering. Here's the qoute.

Parents should not be allowed to change their children DNA because there would be insufficient resources, it is unsafe, goes against some religions, and would split the human race into super humans and humans.

       There's a few things I disagree with here. The first one is when Tony talks about DNA going against some religions. Religion is not very good evidence to go against changing DNA. I think that there are also some religions that would have no problem with altering DNA. So don't bring religion into debates unless you're arguing about something that concerns religion.
       Another thing is the superhuman thing. How would altering DNA mean that people would become super humans. Altering DNA would probably just include stuff on hair color, eye color,or other small things like that. I'm not sure that making changes in DNA would mean that humans would have super strength or other things like that. It would probably be just small things on the human body. So super humans would probably not exist unless DNA alteration was greatly advanced over a long period of time.
       I also don't know how this would lead to insufficient resources. It would still be one person, no matter how much their DNA is changed.So would they eat a lot more or something like that?