The stated objections make sense if you consider that they include an unstated risk component: e.g. "This isn't a useful mutation [given that its downside effects predispose carriers to more severe flu and West Nile + risks inherent in the technique itself]", or "the parents weren't informed properly [and will have to live with the guilt/shame that their ignorance may have caused serious harm to their progeny for generations]" There are even network/ecosystem risks: if governments get the idea that CRISPR's practical potential is trivial, or if potential participants can't trust practitioners, the entire field could suffer setbacks.