Cloning

[Cheetah]

The only thing we can get out of cloning, at least with todays technology, are our own twin-brother/sister. I don't see the point.

 

Though we might get better technology in the future, like being able to grow a human to full-size in a few weeks, etc. Then it might start raising some more conserns.

[iglak]

i say: if we breed it for the purpose of sacrificing it, then there's no point in not sacrificing it. if we breed it so that it can live, then there's no point in sacrificing it. plain and simple (devil's advocate, my favorite position)

[Sayonara]

iglak said in post #52 :

i say: if we breed it for the purpose of sacrificing it, then there's no point in not sacrificing it.

Unless it ends up with unexpected characteristics that merit further study, like super-fast healing abilities a la Number 8 in "Alien: Resurrection".

 

if we breed it so that it can live, then there's no point in sacrificing it.

Unless it ends up with unexpected characteristics that merit running away very quickly, like biting off people's heads a la the Newborn in "Alien: Resurrection".

[Muffin]

I would be against making a clone of yourself, so that you can kill it and take it's organs or something. That would be very wrong. A clone is a person too, and should have exactly the same rights as everyone else.

 

However, if a parent wants to clone a dead child, let em' do it. As long as they understand that they won't be exactly the same, and not to try and force them to do so.

 

Yeah, cloning just seems kinda stupid, but, we might clone a genius, just to advance society furthur. Or as stated they could become a pshyco killer that gets away with everything cuz they're so smart

[Wolfgang Mozart]

I am all for cloning for organs.

 

Regarding reproductive cloning, the usefulness I find in this is when replicating rare genetic patterns. For example, it is quite rare that an Isaac Newton or Wolfgang Mozart or Niels Bohr or Charles Darwin is born. These geniuses have very unique genetic codes and I would support cloning them to increase the amount of creative geniuses.

 

----------------------------------------------------

 

The Case FOR Cloning

 

By Roger Pearson

 

Institute for the Study of Man

 

This paper originally appeared in The Mankind Quarterly , vol. 38, number 3, pp. 69-73

 

Scott-Townsend Publishers, Washington DC., Spring 1998

 

With advances in medical research it would now seem possible to apply cloning techniques to human beings, and C. Richard Seed of Chicago has announced his intention of proceeding with a pilot scheme to implant embryos containing the genes of donor adults into the wombs of surrogate mothers. Because human reproduction has in the past involved a constant intergenerational reassortment of genes, public opinion has been encouraged to react against voluntary reproduction by means of cloning on the grounds that this would produce exact replicas of living individuals. The vailidity of these objections is discussed in this article, and it is pointed out that such objections also constitute an affront against the dignity of identical twins.

 

KEY WORDS: Cloning, bioethics, identical twins, birth control, positive eugenics, intelligence.

 

Citing a "national consensus" that human cloning is "morally unacceptable," President Clinton has come out in support of a recommendation of the National Bioethics Commission (created in 1995) to effectively outlaw introduction of the new technique. But as we all know, consensus does not necessarily signify unanimity, and the reason the Bioethics Commission deemed such a law necessary is that many scientists are only too eager to begin work in the area. If they were not, there would be no need for legislation. If a country decides to restrict scientific activity in this area, there are in fact several legislative options: to ban all research into human cloning, to try to regulate future research, or third, to ban the actual production of human babies by cloning.

 

Complete text at http://www.eugenics.net/papers/RPCLONE.htm

[Glider]

I am all for cloning for organs.

 

Regarding reproductive cloning' date=' the usefulness I find in this is when replicating rare genetic patterns. For example, it is quite rare that an Isaac Newton or Wolfgang Mozart or Niels Bohr or Charles Darwin is born. These geniuses have very unique genetic codes and I would support cloning them to increase the amount of creative geniuses.[/quote']

 

Every individual has a unique genetic code. Qualifiers such as 'very' are redundent when discussing absolutes such as 'unique', and only useful if describing e.g. degree of difference, and it is unlikely that any of these people had a very different genetic code.

 

If you were to clone these people, there is absolutely no guarantee that they would grow into anything like their originals. Even if you could replicate exactly their formative years, you might only increase the probability that a cloned Mozart would have any interest in music or that a Darwin clone would have an interest in natural history and a propensity for sea-sickness. Genetic coding can only account for so much. After all, genes only code for the production of proteins.

[-Demosthenes-]

I'm pretty sure that stem cell research is what eveyone is talking about when they are talking about organs and body parts for use is medical sitituations. You can't clone someone just to kill them and harvest their organs. They would be people.

I think cloning a new person should be up the the original person, and should have the same rights as a parent who wished to have a child. Cloning without permision from the original would be unethical.

[Sayonara]

I'm pretty sure that stem cell research is what eveyone is talking about when they are talking about organs and body parts for use is medical sitituations. You can't clone someone just to kill them and harvest their organs.

That's you leaping to conclusions based on flawed assumptions

 

I think cloning a new person should be up the the original person, and should have the same rights as a parent who wished to have a child. Cloning without permision from the original would be unethical.

I broadly agree!

[-Demosthenes-]

Okay, what's wrong with it? Can you tell me about it plz?

[Sayonara]

Using stem cells doesn't involve killing anything, and it's one of the most promising fields at the moment for any decent chance of solving some of the world's most desperate medical problems.

 

I suggest doing some research on stem cells (from reputable sources, mind), as it's very interesting and will probably affect your life in some way in the future.

 

This gives an overview of one of the more controversial ways of obtaining stem cells:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/3481159.stm

 

Pro-life campaigners lobby that using cells in this way is unethical as they have the potential to become a human. There are two problems with this approach:

 

1 - the chances of that particular few eggs being fertilised and carried to term, had they not been donated, are significantly low.

2 - if one is to object to the removal of these eggs from the 'breeding pool', one might as well posthumously condemn women for failing to get all their eggs fertilised before dying.

[aman]

 

2 - if one is to object to the removal of these eggs from the 'breeding pool'' date=' one might as well posthumously condemn women for failing to get all their eggs fertilised before dying.[/quote']

 

Good point and one I hadn't considered.

 

I feel though that until we can clone with 100% original telomeres and have a pristine DNA to start with we are robbing the cloned individual of maybe a signifigant part of his/her life.

Just aman

[Sayonara]

Why?

[BeckyK]

Right now, I am only comfortable with cloning for medical reasons...

[Aardvark]

What sort of medical reasons? Howe serious a reason would you require?

 

Are you reservations emotional or rational?

[YT2095]

can stem cells be cloned? that would solve quite a few probs if it could be done on a factory type production line!

[admiral_ju00]

No, at least not yet.

But which stem cells are you talking about/thinking of(some of the more promissing research is centered on the Embryonic, Bonemarrow and Kidney) stem cells?