Guest lilbabynushi Posted February 10, 2003 Posted February 10, 2003 .Okay let's look at it this way.Cloning can cause genetic problems ,diseases,and mutations.Look at Dolly,the cloned sheep.She's been diagnosed with arthritis.I'm not saying that it HAS TO BE because of cloning.But some scientists do believe so. If we use stem cells to regrow damaged organs ..it's okay.In fact..nothing like it..but why reproduce an identical human being?What purpose does that serve in practical terms?It's a waste of resources.Science has helped create robots and high tech machines to do great work so why do u need cloned people?Cloning is good when it serves a meaningful purpose.I definitely agree with stem cell research and regrowth of organs because such work is going to be a medical breakthrough.I mean we can then cure diabetes and so many other diseases..maybe even arthritis..a disease that so many people have contracted. But cloned humans have no use at all.Think about it.Some research has also shown that their life is short.The people who have been cloned....their lives get short too.Science should not be bent upon increasing unecessary risks to civilization.I don't mean to be ignorant.I'm not saying this because of some religious purposes..it's just a matter to resourcefulnessand logic. Scientists have all the rights to expand the horizons of knowledge but if it hurts life..it's not worth it. I would appreciate all feedback.Feel free to send in a private message too. My email add is naughty_anushka@yahoo.co.in
Sayonara Posted February 10, 2003 Posted February 10, 2003 Originally posted by lilbabynushi Cloning is good when it serves a meaningful purpose.I definitely agree with stem cell research and regrowth of organs because such work is going to be a medical breakthrough. I voted yes.
fafalone Posted February 10, 2003 Posted February 10, 2003 I think something this thread is completing ignoring that there are outside factors that cause disease. Obviously just because your genetic makeup is the same doesn't mean you're going to get the same diseases. Take the cloned cats for example. They have entirely different patterns on their fur. Cloning does not completely elimate uniqueness. Also, current methods are prone to damage. You're sticking a needle into a cell, and you really expect there to be zero damage? Come on. Techniques will become more advanced, and damage will be less significant. Cloned humans are humans too, their "purpose" is whatever they want.
RED FIRE COW Posted February 11, 2003 Posted February 11, 2003 Cloned humans could serve as sex slaves. We could start a production of pamela andersons and in 20 years we could start selling them to buissness men or anyone wealthy enough to buy the real doll.
PogoC7 Posted February 11, 2003 Posted February 11, 2003 The way I see it. We have no real use for Cloning on earth at this point, but if we did want to clone in the next year. I see us cloning humans for space travel. If we put some humans on a ship which is equipped with cloning tools and we had those clones learn only about their mission (cloning other generations, intergalactic travel, and social relations with aliens ), then it would make some sense to clone humans. We could keep radio contact with these clones as the drift in space. One day we will, but it will be a day were cloning is problem free and the people are conscious free.
Sayonara Posted February 11, 2003 Posted February 11, 2003 I'm not convinced it's such a good idea to use a totally introverted group of clones as ambassadors to represent our species throughout the galaxy.
Aardvark Posted February 11, 2003 Posted February 11, 2003 Deciding that cloning is incorrect in principle because of technical difficulties now is illogical. Technical difficulties can be overcome, probably by experimentation on other species. Any difficulties such as accelerated ageing, arthritis, auto immune problems and the like can be solved. It is important not to confuse the technical problems with the moral issue. Assuming that cloning can be made safe, we have to decide whether we want to do it on its own merits. Personally i feel that government should keep its nose out of peoples reproductive activities but i can see other view points. Its an interesting question.
NSX Posted February 23, 2003 Posted February 23, 2003 Well, the way I see it, cloning is a selfish thing. Humans want to be immortal, that's the bottom line.
RED FIRE COW Posted February 23, 2003 Posted February 23, 2003 Whats so selfish about wanting to be imortal?
NSX Posted February 23, 2003 Posted February 23, 2003 Originally posted by RED FIRE COW Whats so selfish about wanting to be imortal? Well, you never want to lose.
Aardvark Posted February 24, 2003 Posted February 24, 2003 What wrong with being selfish if you're not hurting anyone else?
Sayonara Posted February 24, 2003 Posted February 24, 2003 RICHARD DAWKINS ALERT Don't people read any more?
atinymonkey Posted February 24, 2003 Posted February 24, 2003 I'm having real trouble thinking of a genuine reason behind cloning, the benefits are severely undermined as we can reproduce quite well already. With the mapping of the Genome almost complete we can happily manipulate the DNA to our hearts content. Using some sort of clone ship to travel to far off reaches of space is bizarre, what advantages would a clone have over a G.E. spaceman? Pre engineered samples set aside for production of the next set of crew would make the process a lot easier. Clones are only any use if the memorys can be transplanted across to the clone, which is impossible. Cloning humans serves no real purpose, other than massaging our egos. Unless your looking to build a either a sub species of humans to deal with the menial tasks that people are less willing to do each generation, or an elite section of humanity to govern, influence and generally ponce around like David Essex.
NSX Posted February 24, 2003 Posted February 24, 2003 Originally posted by Aardvark What wrong with being selfish if you're not hurting anyone else? Gimme' an example.
chris Posted February 26, 2003 Posted February 26, 2003 cloning serves no real purpose. none at all. all it does is cause trouble. sure i believe in god. and i believe in aliens. but im gonna take a non religious look at this. what use would a human clone do: work: well why should we put a human through slavery. i know it exisits in many countrys, but why should we force someone to do something we know is wrong. live forever: well you wouldnt be living forever. you would still die, and there would be the other person. not you, the other person. more people: this world is over populated, we need to start killing off people. not creating them i know theres prolly more, but i can not think of any. clonings stupid. theres no reason to create another person. now, i can see infertile couples cloning something for a kid. or a women who can not bare children, have a cloned one. those.. maybe are ok. but cloning to clone is stupid.
NSX Posted February 26, 2003 Posted February 26, 2003 Originally posted by chris live forever: well you wouldnt be living forever. you would still die, and there would be the other person. not you, the other person. Or would you? Now, I'm no BIO major, so I don't really know if this would work, but: What if you could transplant your brain into your body @ any age? The brain is responsible for all functions of the body, so you would retain your memory right? However, to contradict myself about, I read somewhere that some cells, or whatnot can only divide a certain amount of times, which is why we die of natural causes...any input?
NSX Posted February 26, 2003 Posted February 26, 2003 Originally posted by NSX Or would you? Now, I'm no BIO major, so I don't really know if this would work, but: What if you could transplant your brain into your body @ any age? The brain is responsible for all functions of the body, so you would retain your memory right? But @ a younger age, so your body is still good as new. However, to contradict myself about, I read somewhere that some cells, or whatnot can only divide a certain amount of times, which is why we die of natural causes...any input?
atinymonkey Posted February 26, 2003 Posted February 26, 2003 Originally posted by NSX Or would you? Now, I'm no BIO major, so I don't really know if this would work, but: What if you could transplant your brain into your body @ any age? The brain is responsible for all functions of the body, so you would retain your memory right? But @ a younger age, so your body is still good as new. However, to contradict myself about, I read somewhere that some cells, or whatnot can only divide a certain amount of times, which is why we die of natural causes...any input? Yes, funnily enough the problems associated with the ageing process affect the brain as well as the body. A healthy person will only have 90% of his brain function at 70 years old and decrease year on year from there. Not counting that fact you cannot transplant a brain as the nerve cells do not regrow in the ganglion nerve and/at/or the spinal column. Or the cumulative damage the brain accumulates during one lifetime with drinking ,accidents and illness.
the GardenGnome Posted February 27, 2003 Posted February 27, 2003 Clone will help serve in Microsoft evil plan for world domination. Microsith will develop an evil clone army that will wipeout all competion in their way. But the lawful Linux users will fight back in save the day. This story is just an exageration of what just might be.
NSX Posted February 28, 2003 Posted February 28, 2003 Originally posted by atinymonkey Yes, funnily enough the problems associated with the ageing process affect the brain as well as the body. A healthy person will only have 90% of his brain function at 70 years old and decrease year on year from there. Not counting that fact you cannot transplant a brain as the nerve cells do not regrow in the ganglion nerve and/at/or the spinal column. Or the cumulative damage the brain accumulates during one lifetime with drinking ,accidents and illness. So when you say 90%, is it b/c the other 10% has just completely deceased? or is it plainly not in use? Originally posted by the GardenGnome Clone will help serve in Microsoft evil plan for world domination. Microsith will develop an evil clone army that will wipeout all competion in their way. But the lawful Linux users will fight back in save the day. This story is just an exageration of what just might be. I shall fight for the Linux army! Oh no, Gates is onto me...arghh...the Blue Screen!! ......
the GardenGnome Posted February 28, 2003 Posted February 28, 2003 Nature does things well. Nothing good will come out of cloning humans.
fafalone Posted February 28, 2003 Posted February 28, 2003 Nature clones humans all the time. Identical twins. The governments policy is quite hypocritical in not declaring twins an abhorrent travesty of nature just because it happens without our intervention, but if we duplicate the same procedure with science, it's wrong. Ok?? Idiot Roman Catholic government.
T_FLeX Posted February 28, 2003 Posted February 28, 2003 Originally posted by RED FIRE COW Whats so selfish about wanting to be imortal? Nothing. It's our God given right!
greg1917 Posted March 1, 2003 Posted March 1, 2003 Identical twins maybe effective clones but thats a totally different situation, you'd be creating people who would live with the stigma of not being natural, only having a single parent and at the core of things, created because of some biologists desire to get his name in the paper. Why should humans feel they have the right to bring life into this world for a scientific exercise? Thats immoral and a faceless misapplication of science. The people pushing this are a combination of rich nutters who want to clone their dead pets and grieving parents who want to clone their late child, situations like that. Obviously peoples views on will vary but you also have to consider how the legalities of this would work. Are the clones parents the parents of the original person? What if problems like premature aging cant be overcome and are inherently associated with clones? Dolly the sheep having arthritis may not just be another problem of clones, that might be a characteristic about cloning itself you cant change. Not proven but just a thought.
the GardenGnome Posted March 1, 2003 Posted March 1, 2003 Originally posted by fafalone Nature clones humans all the time. Identical twins. The governments policy is quite hypocritical in not declaring twins an abhorrent travesty of nature just because it happens without our intervention, but if we duplicate the same procedure with science, it's wrong. Ok?? Idiot Roman Catholic government. But see, when one would clone themselves the cloned person would consider their clone to become property of themselves. Not just like a parent would raise a child, it would be likely for the person to use their clone as a slave.
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