Hm. Yeah, point taken, though I'd probably have to be American to be able to take this seriously on a gut level.

Still, the original example was clearer. It had a clear opposition, Bad according to genes, Good according to humans (even if not all of them). The modified example would lose that, as people generally do leave, and want to leave, descendants. It doesn't convey that sense of a sharp break with the "original intention".

Can't seem to think of an equally strong example that would be less likely to be objectionable...