Cloning. What if any should be the limits?

[Greatest I am]

Cloning. What if any should be the limits?

 

We have begun to clone various animals and chimeras.

 

As technology progresses, and it inevitably will, we will push the envelop of cloning to, I believe, it’s furthest reaches.

 

We, I think, have not done much with human cloning but it is a possibility in the future.

 

What, if any, should be the limits set for cloning technologies?

 

We know that, over time, some countries will likely not have any limits on these technologies.

 

I think that competitive forces will eventually force all countries to remove any limits.

 

Stem cell research is a good example of these competitive forces. Obama reversed Bushes restrictions on this research and called it a good political decision to reverse a bad religious one.

 

What, if any, should be the limits set for cloning technologies?

 

Regards

 

DL

 

 

[Blackadder09]

the only limit i would set is that cloning on animals should be perfected before moving onto humans, at this stage i'd assume it'd be pretty irresponsible to try and clone a human.

[SMF]

If the condition, with which I agree, that Blackadder09 identified was satisfied, I would like to hear what positive and negative outcomes of human cloning are perceived by others. SM

[zapatos]

If my wife and I could not have children due to a problem with me, and my options for children would be to fertilize my wife's egg with someone else's sprerm, or to have a clone, I would choose clone.

 

I also don't see the need to perfect it in animals first. Doing so would not mean we would have no problems in cloning humans. However, standard rules should be put in place for the conditions under which cloning may be attempted, just as was done with transplants or any other cutting edge procedures.

 

I do expect much moaning and gnashing of teeth from the devoutly religious just as with many new procedures, such as the response to 'test tube' babies and the first surgical procedures.

[Greatest I am]

the only limit i would set is that cloning on animals should be perfected before moving onto humans, at this stage i'd assume it'd be pretty irresponsible to try and clone a human.

 

I agree.

 

You have no quals about cloning humans?

 

Regards

DL

 

If the condition, with which I agree, that Blackadder09 identified was satisfied, I would like to hear what positive and negative outcomes of human cloning are perceived by others. SM

 

I can picture a worst case scenario where marlim Monroe is clones to produce mindless sex machines.

 

Secular governments are about to the point where they will legalize prostitution and in effect place a price on the use of human bodies like any other tool or comodity.

Quite ugly but it is on the way.

 

Who if any will care about these sexual mindless chimera?

 

Regards

DL

 

If my wife and I could not have children due to a problem with me, and my options for children would be to fertilize my wife's egg with someone else's sprerm, or to have a clone, I would choose clone.

 

I also don't see the need to perfect it in animals first. Doing so would not mean we would have no problems in cloning humans. However, standard rules should be put in place for the conditions under which cloning may be attempted, just as was done with transplants or any other cutting edge procedures.

 

I do expect much moaning and gnashing of teeth from the devoutly religious just as with many new procedures, such as the response to 'test tube' babies and the first surgical procedures.

 

 

What I said to SMF applies here too, I think, and I would add that I think we shall see science produce, let’s say a self contained utter and digestive system of a cow to produce milk, instead of a full cow, in the future, so a sex machine will not be far behind that kind of ----innovation.

 

Humans have no limit to imagination.

 

 

 

We all know that somehow and somewhere, someone will break any rules authority puts in place.

 

Even as we speak, all major cities have a sex slave market and my scenario is not that far off track.

 

Regards

DL

 

 

[ecoli]

I can picture a worst case scenario where marlim Monroe is clones to produce mindless sex machines.

 

I'm not sure who Marlim Monroe is, but how do you jump from cloning to such sophisticated genetic engineering. You do realize that the two are not equivilent

[Blahah]

I can picture a worst case scenario where marlim Monroe is clones to produce mindless sex machines.

Hasten the day! I vote to remove all limitations on cloning, and to provide massive public funding for a Marliyn sex-machine cloning programme.

 

 

 

unless... did you mean Marlin?....

 

 

Edited March 28, 2011 by Blahah

[SMF]

Greatist I am:

 

Your response to me is specious. As was said by others, there is no relationship between clones and some sort of science fiction sex industry.

 

SM

[lemur]

what about cloning brainless replicants of wealthy people who can afford it for use as body-donors for brain-transplants that facilitate eternal life in a younger version of your own body? Should people do this until they run out of money to afford a new clone-body brain-recipient?

 

blahblah, after seeing your posted photo of a marlin in reference to Marilyn Monroe, I briefly got a mental image of a hybrid marlin-Marylin-Monroe fish-human acting sexy to solicit prostitution. Thanks.

Edited March 29, 2011 by lemur

[Ringer]

The only worry I would have with human cloning is that clones made from things that are older tend to have age related difficulties much earlier than they normally should. Dolly ended up being put down when she was relatively young from lung disease and arthritis.

 

Also for the whole sex slave or organ slave thing, if the above problem was worked out, the clones would still be humans. Being humans they would still have all the basic human rights. Saying otherwise is the equivalent of saying only one identical twin has basic human rights.

Edited March 29, 2011 by Ringer

[lemur]

Saying otherwise is the equivalent of saying only one identical twin has basic human rights.

Don't identical twins use each other as sex surrogates? Wasn't this the premise of the Parent Trap movies (in a quaint, non-chalant way)?

Edited March 29, 2011 by lemur

[Blahah]

The only worry I would have with human cloning is that clones made from things that are older tend to have age related difficulties much earlier than they normally should. Dolly ended up being put down when she was relatively young from lung disease and arthritis.

 

Also for the whole sex slave or organ slave thing, if the above problem was worked out, the clones would still be humans. Being humans they would still have all the basic human rights. Saying otherwise is the equivalent of saying only one identical twin has basic human rights.

 

If we engineered them to lack consciousness, it would be no different to farming human-looking animals.

[Greatest I am]

I'm not sure who Marlim Monroe is, but how do you jump from cloning to such sophisticated genetic engineering. You do realize that the two are not equivilent

 

Do you think one science will take off without the other being close behind?

I see them both progressing closely enough that they will mesh. Watch.

 

Regards

DL

 

Greatist I am:

 

Your response to me is specious. As was said by others, there is no relationship between clones and some sort of science fiction sex industry.

 

SM

 

The present systems already abuses human bodies produced the normal way. Are you so dense that you cannot extrapolate from there?

 

Regards

DL

 

The only worry I would have with human cloning is that clones made from things that are older tend to have age related difficulties much earlier than they normally should. Dolly ended up being put down when she was relatively young from lung disease and arthritis.

 

Also for the whole sex slave or organ slave thing, if the above problem was worked out, the clones would still be humans. Being humans they would still have all the basic human rights. Saying otherwise is the equivalent of saying only one identical twin has basic human rights.

 

I think that all the technical problems will eventually be taken care of and as far as human rights go, the mindless hulk of organs that we end up growing will not be thought of as human.

 

Regards

DL

 

If we engineered them to lack consciousness, it would be no different to farming human-looking animals.

 

 

Exactly. The ugly scenario I see will be a beautiful body with just enough consciousness to survive, suck and fuck. Yuk.

 

Regards

 

DL

 

 

[Marat]

The most sensible use of cloning would be to produce nearly genetically-identical matches to existing humans in order to provide a source of spare body parts for people who are now desperately suffering due to major organ failure. There is now a huge shortage of organs for transplant, which causes enormous human suffering and death all throughout the developed world where transplants would otherwise be feasible, and it is a moral imperative to reduce this as far as possible. If anencephalic clones genetically matching those needing organs were available, the organs could be freely harvested from them without harming truly human entities, since anencephalics have less brain than a lizard and so although they look humanoid they should not really be given the same ethical status as humans.

 

Unfortunately, 'ethical concerns' of people who are obsessed with the sacredness of whatever looks humanish but who have no concern for the actual suffering of ordinary humans now severely limit experimentation in developing animal models of anencephalic clones, since they can see where this research is ultimately headed. A positivistic, rational, rather than emotive or aesthetic ethics should see our ultimate duty as the reduction of suffering in entities with genuine human consciousness, not in the preservation of the imaginary sacredness of things that look humanish without having any real human consciousness.

 

If cloned sex slaves or slave workers were anencephalics, then perhaps we should wonder why there would be any ethical duties to treat them as ordinary humans with ordinary human legal rights. If a dog happens to have a humanoid face does that necessarily increase its legal rights above the level of chattel, which is the status it has in law if it doesn't look human? Similarly, should an anencephalic humanoid, which is very much less intelligent and has much less conscious awareness than a dog, have any special legal status above that of an ordinary object just because it has four limbs and a face which looks like a cross between a human and a cat?

 

There might be some problem with fingerprinting if cloning became general, or with confusions between similar looking people, but these already occur with identical twins, though much less commonly.

 

Cloning would also allow us to produce genetically exact copies of humans who have made great contributions to humanity and science, such as Gandhi and Einstein, though the effect of nurture on nature would mean that we would at most have a better chance of getting a good person out of such genetic copies, rather than any guarantees.

[Blahah]

If cloned sex slaves or slave workers were anencephalics, then perhaps we should wonder why there would be any ethical duties to treat them as ordinary humans with ordinary human legal rights. If a dog happens to have a humanoid face does that necessarily increase its legal rights above the level of chattel, which is the status it has in law if it doesn't look human? Similarly, should an anencephalic humanoid, which is very much less intelligent and has much less conscious awareness than a dog, have any special legal status above that of an ordinary object just because it has four limbs and a face which looks like a cross between a human and a cat?

 

That's what I meant. Why should a humanoid engineered to feel nothing be given rights? They would make excellent tools and menial workers, no different from using a horse to pull a cart. I don't think it's disgusting at all, I think it would be fine to be able to produce worker humanoids.

[SMF]

Greatest I am says-

 

The present systems already abuses human bodies produced the normal way. Are you so dense that you cannot extrapolate from there?

 

But is unable to see that if this problem is already happening, without cloning, that cloning is not a cause of the problem. Solve the abuse problem. Who is dense? SM

[Greatest I am]

 

 

Cloning would also allow us to produce genetically exact copies of humans who have made great contributions to humanity and science, such as Gandhi and Einstein, though the effect of nurture on nature would mean that we would at most have a better chance of getting a good person out of such genetic copies, rather than any guarantees.

 

Cloning a body is easy. Cloning a mind, impossible.

An Einstein clone could end up being a dunce without the right rearing.

 

Regards

DL

 

Greatest I am says-

 

 

 

But is unable to see that if this problem is already happening, without cloning, that cloning is not a cause of the problem. Solve the abuse problem. Who is dense? SM

 

 

I said nothing about solving the abuse. I just showed how it and cloning will meld.

 

The solution is simple to know. All we need do is venerate human life.

The how of getting that mind set is the hard part.

 

Regards

DL

 

That's what I meant. Why should a humanoid engineered to feel nothing be given rights? They would make excellent tools and menial workers, no different from using a horse to pull a cart. I don't think it's disgusting at all, I think it would be fine to be able to produce worker humanoids.

 

I cannot see humans being better at menial tasks than machines. We already see this all about. Human dummy clones will not outwork machines.

 

Regards

DL

[SMF]

Greatest I am:

 

I said nothing about solving the abuse. I just showed how it and cloning will meld.

 

The solution is simple to know. All we need do is venerate human life.

The how of getting that mind set is the hard part.

 

So, because producing a better form of transportation, or generating power, or communication would also enhance ("meld?") the illicit sex trade, they would all be the cause of a bad outcome. Your logic is specious. SM

[Doc. Josh]

I think cloning would in fact be a great idea to do in such a way of donor body parts. somthing on the lines of at birth you clone a body but somehow make it (empty) lifeless so as not to disrupt or affect a living human. And if you ever needed a kidney, heart, lung, brain, or a whole body it would be at your disposal. A perfect unused 21 year old body. Giving someone a chance to live another 70 years. Limits are only in place so as not to be abused, every one who wants to can and will abuse anything to their advantage. So even if limits are put into place would it even matter.

[Greatest I am]

I think cloning would in fact be a great idea to do in such a way of donor body parts. somthing on the lines of at birth you clone a body but somehow make it (empty) lifeless so as not to disrupt or affect a living human. And if you ever needed a kidney, heart, lung, brain, or a whole body it would be at your disposal. A perfect unused 21 year old body. Giving someone a chance to live another 70 years. Limits are only in place so as not to be abused, every one who wants to can and will abuse anything to their advantage. So even if limits are put into place would it even matter.

 

Do the laws we presently have that control science and medicine matter. Most people think they do.

Do they really? I’m not sure.

It seems not because secularism is more geared to freedom and not so much to dignity which is what this O P is indirectly speaking to in terms of veneration of life.

 

Regards

 

DL

 

 

[lemur]

The most sensible use of cloning would be to produce nearly genetically-identical matches to existing humans in order to provide a source of spare body parts for people who are now desperately suffering due to major organ failure. There is now a huge shortage of organs for transplant, which causes enormous human suffering and death all throughout the developed world where transplants would otherwise be feasible, and it is a moral imperative to reduce this as far as possible. If anencephalic clones genetically matching those needing organs were available, the organs could be freely harvested from them without harming truly human entities, since anencephalics have less brain than a lizard and so although they look humanoid they should not really be given the same ethical status as humans.

 

Unfortunately, 'ethical concerns' of people who are obsessed with the sacredness of whatever looks humanish but who have no concern for the actual suffering of ordinary humans now severely limit experimentation in developing animal models of anencephalic clones, since they can see where this research is ultimately headed. A positivistic, rational, rather than emotive or aesthetic ethics should see our ultimate duty as the reduction of suffering in entities with genuine human consciousness, not in the preservation of the imaginary sacredness of things that look humanish without having any real human consciousness.

 

If cloned sex slaves or slave workers were anencephalics, then perhaps we should wonder why there would be any ethical duties to treat them as ordinary humans with ordinary human legal rights. If a dog happens to have a humanoid face does that necessarily increase its legal rights above the level of chattel, which is the status it has in law if it doesn't look human? Similarly, should an anencephalic humanoid, which is very much less intelligent and has much less conscious awareness than a dog, have any special legal status above that of an ordinary object just because it has four limbs and a face which looks like a cross between a human and a cat?

 

There might be some problem with fingerprinting if cloning became general, or with confusions between similar looking people, but these already occur with identical twins, though much less commonly.

 

Cloning would also allow us to produce genetically exact copies of humans who have made great contributions to humanity and science, such as Gandhi and Einstein, though the effect of nurture on nature would mean that we would at most have a better chance of getting a good person out of such genetic copies, rather than any guarantees.

Does the eugenics of any of this cause any red-lights to go on for you? Do you think that some people have the right to engineer life for others according to their own self-attributed cultural superiority? If you were just talking about intervening in other's lives where they become a danger to themselves or others, that would be one thing - but you're talking about subjugating living beings as chattel to projects beyond their ability to be informed and consent. How do you eventually tell a child that they were engineered to be a clone of Einstein and will subsequently spend their whole lives as an object of scientific and academic scrutiny?

 

 

 

[Greatest I am]

Does the eugenics of any of this cause any red-lights to go on for you? Do you think that some people have the right to engineer life for others according to their own self-attributed cultural superiority? If you were just talking about intervening in other's lives where they become a danger to themselves or others, that would be one thing - but you're talking about subjugating living beings as chattel to projects beyond their ability to be informed and consent. How do you eventually tell a child that they were engineered to be a clone of Einstein and will subsequently spend their whole lives as an object of scientific and academic scrutiny?

 

 

 

 

Good point.

 

Speaking of eugenics. Will the rich not have a rather good tool to lock their families into a perpetual position above the poor classes who would never be able to keep up with them.

 

Even as we speak, some families, notably those in politics or working for governments, have become a superior class within our demographic pyramids.

 

Will society be stratified into a caste system based on wealth?

 

Regards

DL

[lemur]

Good point.

 

Speaking of eugenics. Will the rich not have a rather good tool to lock their families into a perpetual position above the poor classes who would never be able to keep up with them.

 

Even as we speak, some families, notably those in politics or working for governments, have become a superior class within our demographic pyramids.

 

Will society be stratified into a caste system based on wealth?

 

I wouldn't get too pessimistic (or optimistic depending on what side your on) just yet. Eugenics always seems to backfire, as does social-economic stratification. Intensive consumption lifestyles require higher levels of dependency on people who become increasingly dissatisfied with their end of the bargain. Rebellion rarely happens but recession is a common result when higher classes attempt to maintain economies that employ large numbers of people in service of maintaining privileges that they don't themselves have (much) access to. This is deviating from the OP, though, so suffice to say that cloning, like other kinds of selective breeding will result in unforeseen health problems and those that can only afford to breed the cheap way will be coveted for their genetic health (I suspect).

[ecoli]

Good point.

 

Speaking of eugenics. Will the rich not have a rather good tool to lock their families into a perpetual position above the poor classes who would never be able to keep up with them.

 

Even as we speak, some families, notably those in politics or working for governments, have become a superior class within our demographic pyramids.

 

Will society be stratified into a caste system based on wealth?

 

Regards

DL

 

Considering that most rich people today are "self-made" what exactly are your concerns in relation to human cloning?

[Greatest I am]

Considering that most rich people today are "self-made" what exactly are your concerns in relation to human cloning?

 

As I said. just the stratification of our socio economic demographic pyramid.

 

You may be right about the nouveau riche but as I also stated above, we already have the political and government workers above the rest of us, generelly speaking that is, and it would get worse if the rich and powerful were longer lived or could download into cloned bodies.

 

Regards

DL