*has fundie parents
The major objection to "Playing God", is really the interpretation of Genesis, where god creates the earth itself, then says it is "good", creates the oceans and says they are "good", and then creates all the plants and animals, and says they are "good."
God is a real stickler for perfectionism. (understatement of the millennium)
He doesn't do lackluster work, you see. If he says it's "Good", it's clearly much better than you could do. The claim that you could "improve" that, is seen as being overly arrogant and worshiping "the god of the self". (There's actually many references to this in the new testament, many in red-letters. -- 'god of the self' I mean.)
Remember, the sin that lucifer committed was to say "in his heart", that he would become like god, and replace god/surpass god.
That god represents absolute perfection is a profound axiom to the fundamentalist christian, and asserting that god makes imperfect work and imperfect creations (needing of, or capable of being improved by a known faulty creation, which was originally created perfect-- humans--- ) is beyond heretical. That's why they take such big offense to it. Most lack the cogitative fidelity to articulate that chain of reason though, and just suffer the mental trainwreck instead.
This is the reason they object harshly to evolution, and such.
The way I approach this when communicating with them, is not to assert that they are stupid, irrational, or mentally deranged (The conclusion they have come to actually is a product of reason, just from some very curious axioms); I approach it from the angle that "You, as a human, cannot understand what perfection is-- and god, as a being that knows all of time and space, and all of history, past, present, and future, is able to determine what is and is not perfect; Since time is not static, and things to change in the environment, in order for the creations of god to be perfect, they have to change as well-- The perfection could be that they DO change, and god's perfect knowledge allows him to know exactly what humans will be able to do, now or 100,000 years from now. He made it EXACTLY the way it needs to be, and it needs to be able to change. Remember, god created all of creation for his own pleasure-- for a being that exists simultaneously in all frames of reference, which would be more pleasing: a creation that stays still and eternal forever, and does not move, change, or have dynamic qualities-- Or one that does, but who's motions and patterns of change follow good wholesome rules?"
This usually cuts through the axiomatic "No! DO NOT WANT!" of their brains seizing up under the mental trainwreck of the apparent axiom violation, but tends to spark additional questions or for them to raise additional concerns, noteworthy amongst those are choice samples of the levitical laws, and the latter part of genesis where the angels come down from heaven and start screwing stuff up big time (and thus requiring the flood)-- coupled with parts of revelation asserting that (in the end times it shall be) "Like the days of Noah."
I can settle those questions too, having been deeply steeped in fundamentalist soup-- but they don't always like the answers, and the chain of discussion can wildly diverge from there. (they often don't like the first set of answers either, and I usually have to pull jesus out of my pocket numerous times to soften them up.)
The really real underlying problem is that fundamentalist christians (and probably other abrahamic religions) is that they have atrophied critical thinking skills, because they let their religious texts (and their preachers) do the thinking for them. (amusingly, this goes against many of the teachings of the christ, but that little oversight doesn't seem to sink in.) This leads to many of the issues that they encounter with axioms appearing to shatter inside their minds, and the resulting irrational spew.
(Imagine for a moment that science discovered that the universe REALLY IS a hologram/simulation-- and really ISN'T the objective showpiece they have thought it was all this time--- Make it even more insanity causing, because the evidence for that is inside the simulation itself, and thus also cannot be trusted (Reality is NOT self-consistent!) -- See how many objectivists still cling tightly to experiment as the end-all of discussion, and or-- go on tirades.)
LB is right that the bible can be twisted 7 ways to Sunday, and can be used to support basically anything, if you know where and how to twist. I suspect it was designed to be that way, or at least grew to be that way as a result of weasel-wording by ancient clerics being put under the spotlight with hard questions they couldn't answer. Regardless of how the bible came to be the way it is, it is that way now-- and LB is absolutely right about that.
The underlying problem with transhumanism and the christian fundie is that the concept violates the "literal" (as in writing) bounds of the axioms they were nurtured on. To get anything besides "NO!" from them, you have to first re-rail their minds. The engines of that train use strange parts. Modern ones don't fit. Just keep that in mind.