This is the kind of thinking social media enables. When everyone in your group already agrees with what you say, the standards of thought fall due to lack of challenge.

I didn't think it was so challenging to use the term "genetics" after all from a reasonable point of view our genes are the blueprint of the body and our emotional responses derive from that...

And before any architects reply smartly about the misuse of the term "blueprint" see here: https://socratic.org/questions/why-is-dna-called-the-bluepri...

I agree that attributing this to genetics is somewhat abstract - it would normally be attributed as a phenomenon of psychology. And "more attracted to the negative than the positive" is an ambiguous way of putting what I guess the OP meant - that fear is a more compelling emotional driver than "positive" things such as the desires to consume or procreate. But in the very long run, since this is all the result of evolution (leaving aside for now the possibility that it is all God moving in His mysterious ways, which, whilst I certainly can't disprove, isn't the thrust of the criticism) and considering that these same behavioral preferences are readily observable in all animals and indeed many plants and bacteria, then the suggestion that they are indeed ultimately transmitted and shaped by genetics seems reasonable?

This thesis is from psychology, not genetics: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negativity_bias

There were a number of studies in psychology related to the negativity bias. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negativity_bias .

A euphemism, by which i meant "hard wired". Human's are like every species pre-disposed in so many way to be driven by the negative rather than the positive.