Earlier quoted context omitted.
Now what is more human then - human body or that of an android? Of course android body. It doesn't matter that it is not innate because we weren't born with it. What matters is that we have consciously chosen to build it and replace our body. If you keep going with the theme of 'the changes we come up with are more human than what is innate', where does it end?
Certainly an android is more human - humans and only humans create those machines and make them a part of us. We could ask, was mowgli more human than all of the suited gentlemen in New York? Of course not. Mowgli was lesser human than them. Where does it end? Who knows? At this point, Isaac Asimov's The Last Question comes to my mind.
Being human is not about being nice and living in harmony. It's about struggle and unfairness, compassion, competition, fights, power, tranquility, hate, love and war. I don't think there is anything rational or reasonable about it.
Ultimately, any sort of action increases entropy. So might as well enjoy it while it lasts instead of thinking of the greater good and how to force humans into this hegemony of cooperation and sustainability.
This is not to say that some of the more base instincts/behaviors shouldn't be squashed, but I think we should stop short of suppressing most of them.