-Demosthenes- Posted March 22, 2004 Posted March 22, 2004 But what does it mean if someone gets cloned? Are they a person? Do they diserve the same rights as us? Are they the same person? It's unethical to clone a person.
Ms. DNA Posted March 23, 2004 Posted March 23, 2004 -Demosthenes- said in post # :But what does it mean if someone gets cloned? Are they a person? Do they diserve the same rights as us? Are they the same person? It's unethical to clone a person. Clones are people and deserve the same rights as anyone else. After all, identical twins are natural clones, but they're considered two different people. A clone could even be raised in a different environment from the person he or she was cloned from, so he or she would certainly be a unique individual too.
Neurocomp2003 Posted March 23, 2004 Posted March 23, 2004 yes but clones are manufactured by researches and twins are naturally produces by humans... morality also comes into play should we distribute clones into different environments...if this allowed then we can study them in research for NATURE vs NURTURE...which leads to is this an amoral issue.
Sayonara Posted March 23, 2004 Posted March 23, 2004 Neurocomp2003 said in post # :yes but clones are manufactured by researches and twins are naturally produces by humans... That's the reason the rights issue exists, not justification for taking rights away from clones.
Sayonara Posted March 23, 2004 Posted March 23, 2004 -Demosthenes- said in post # :Are they a person? Do they diserve the same rights as us? Are they the same person? It's unethical to clone a person. 1) Yes, of course. 2) I see no reason why not. 3) No, of course not. 4) Why?
-Demosthenes- Posted March 23, 2004 Posted March 23, 2004 because if it is unethical then we shouldn't do it.
Sayonara Posted March 23, 2004 Posted March 23, 2004 -Demosthenes- said in post # :because if it is unethical then we shouldn't do it. It's unethical to clone a person because if it is unethical then we shouldn't do it? What?
Sayonara Posted March 24, 2004 Posted March 24, 2004 It's not the first time you've stated that as a plain fact.
Bryn Posted March 24, 2004 Posted March 24, 2004 tbh i doubt they have done it, there crack pots. The only real issue involving human cloning, or any cloning of an intelligant animal, should be the risk to quality of life for the clonded individual. Dolly was one short lived sheep, out of almost 300 embryos. Many aborted late in pregnancy, and some died after birth. That is unacceptable for a human and tbh for a sheep as well. The first time someone does clone a human will probably be illegally and end in failure. But once it's been done, and suceeded, it will open the flood gates. It's just a question of someone with questionable moral fibre doing the first couple. I only hope by the time it comes common practice we have a little more living space than this rock, otherwise it's gona get rather cramped.
Guest Orange Crush Posted May 6, 2004 Posted May 6, 2004 It's time to think a little outside of the box. If identical twins are from a single cloned Zygote, Then cloning is simply producing the same results with a different method. I do not see how that is unethical. Take natural and invitro fertilization. Both yield children that are of the womb. Just different methods of fertilization. Neither are unethical. Twins and clones are both born of a womb. I know a pair of twins. They are alike in some respects and in others different. They are not the same person, due to their experiences. I like them both, but one of them annoys me time to time. The same would be the result of a clone. It would be a different person altogether. Movies that play on ignorant fears of science, like Godsend, do nothing to further the cause of common sense and science. I would not mind having a twin brother. Cloning will make optional what nature made random. It's not a new concept.
Leroy Posted July 20, 2004 Posted July 20, 2004 i think the whole cloning issue is so blown up by uber ethics people (whatever you would call them) it like saying inbreeding or cross-breeding is unethical yet most of us are a product of it. So it most of our food and drink. So i really think being against an idea simply because we don't know the long term effects is like saying you don't want to go to someone's house because you've never met them. Fear of the unknown plunged us into the dark age and people who did think most of us do these days were considered witches. I think the same kind of thing is happening now, in that the people who consider the possibilty of cloning are the witches of the 21st century.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now