I would have no qualms genetically engineering my children if I could. I'd opt for traits inherent in my or my partners genetic background that benefit brain functions. I'd try to keep height around 5'10" - 6'0" (I'm 6'1" at 17, so I have the tall genes)due to that being a physically robust height whilst not being a major medical danger. I would opt for an efficient metabolism, and for good muscle characteristics. I'd leave things like hair and eye colour to the luck of the draw with some exceptions (like dirty blonde, ew (no offense, I just don't like it)) I'd opt for good vision and if possible to prevent tinnitus (I don't see these as major medical issues, and hence not at the same level as cancer.) And I'd opt for a robust immune system.
That said, I wouldn't want to tailor my child's every aspect. I'd want them to be them, not my real life Sims character.
Of, and I'd make sure to eliminate chances of brain wave ratio unbalance (I have the issue and it makes task switching different, although it has no serious side effects and isn't considered anything more than a medical happenstance.)
Oh, and ambidextrousness.

I'd give a genetic predisposition towards both intelligence and curiosity. Hell, by the time we've invented technology for this level of genetic tampering, the cure for 99% of cancer is probably already been found, with the last of it just around the corner.

This once again is a very polarizing issue (and one that made me think for a bit) but my answer is that I wouldn't. I think that it would give a bit too much control over my child's life before my son/daughter took a single breath. I would not want to change anything about my child, reality intended the child to be how it was wrought. But you could also argue that reality wanted me to change my child, but the spark of life is not something to be tampered with by clumsy human hands.

No. Some people have already mentioned that it's a "slippery slope" so I suppose saying that would be going with the herd.

Gene-scrubbing, gene-cleansing, genetic modicifation, whatever you wish to call it, it's changing what we are, what we've been since the beginning of our species and what we are meant to be until we evolve into something more, or die out.

Human beings as a whole are terrible at resisting temptation. Once you change the gender, you might as well tinker with their height and weight, predisposed body composition, skin, hair and eye pigmentation, mental capacity. Nothing is ever good enough. This society's obsessive desire to obtain perfect is it's own undoing. Our vanity will be the death of us.

Everyone wants the perfect child, but what happens when that desire leads to obsession? What happends when what you consider perfection is unacceptable to those around you? Genetically altering your cells to create a more ideal child would undoubtedly lead down the path toward more radical thinking. With such technology, one could mold mankind into a perfect being, no illness, no defect, everyone the same.

Not to mention the fact that trusting someone to do that kind of service is tempting them to influence more than the things we desire. A human being that can be made more ideal can be made to be controlled. Eventually there'd be no need to reproduce physically at all, let the government grow us in test tubes and controlled environments, perfecting us, teaching us, giving us perfect lives where everyone's content, doing our duty because it's all we know, screwing like rabbits because they've made us sterile to maintain that perfect cycle. The idea reminds me of Brave New World.

Sorry this thing's so long, guess I got to thinkin too hard about it.

yes. my father and grandfather both had only sons. i would like a little girl someday that i can spoil rotten. but other then gender no, i wouldn't change a thing.

Absolutely. It's the prisoner's dilemma, but with kids.

Sure, I could take a stance saying that such modification is abhorrent ("designer children"), and that I should be willing to let nature do its thing... but natural selection doesn't work in humans (or at least, not in a way near to what it does in other organisms), and in any case such an argument would be completely self-serving, concerned only with my personal comfort and not at all with my child's best interests.

If everyone had access to the gene technology to increase the intelligence of their child there would be smarter criminals statistically, but then there would be smarter authorities to catch them as well. To say that the bad guys would win because of this augmentation is grossly ignorant relying on the fact that humans are distinctly evil by nature, nurturing has little to no factoring in the individuals personality or moral compass, and that evil fruits evil. In the case that all that is true, we are already on the edge of self destruction without these genetic manipulation by the fact that for some reason we have barely spawned more intelligent good guys than bad guys and the practice of altering one's intelligence potential before conception has little to no actual effect on crime levels since we'll be outnumbered, overpowered, and outwitted with or without this advantage in a matter of years.

Choosing what attributes for your child is nothing short of building your child. Without the random potentials inherent in the process of conception, people have a much narrower and limited potential.

Dang if you could actually choose changing intelligence I might be a little scared of children with glowing eyes.

no. natural selection should be just that. natural. and all advances or superiority that that child may have should be through hard work and discipline.