Cloning

[Bullroarer]

Is it ethical in your opinion.

[Kingcrazygenius]

I think it's kinda pointless. Even if we clone someone what are we gonna do with it? Sell its organs?

[Nio the Namless]

Assuming you mean cloning as more then just people I will say it depends...


Cloning pigs so they have human organs so that they can be used in people that need transplants I believe it ethical. (though the actually cloning process would only be for the first X many)

Cloning certian extict or endanger species would be ok if it was not used as a susitute for actually caring for the enviroment.

But cloning people is just plain wrong. First off, do we need more? Second your creating a new human beging. Despite having all your genes (or whoevres) that clone will still think differently from you. It will have its own experiences and own believes/attitudes. It may have many of your personality traits but it still is a human being. I don't think people have the right to "play God."

Like KCG said what are you doing to do with the people even after you actually clone them (when usually has a couple of dead clones before it). I mean its still a person you can't just use him/her like a marketitable(sp) product.

I am also against altering humans genetic makeup outside of preventing a kid from having down sydrome or some such disease. I really don't want a bunch of scientist making the "super human." That would just be scary (and most likly further widen the gap of right and poor. Just imagine "I am a super genius, a super athlet, and even a natural when it comes to the arts. My dad had the doctors play with my genes. Beat that!")


In short I believe if it is used in an intellegent and sensitive manner that clonning is alright, though clonning people would never be right.

[disjuku]

I think its wrong. Do we really know enough to start messing with nature?

cloning humans - no way man, there are enough of us already, no point. Not to mention protential risks, how would you like to be a clone?
cloning pigs for organs - how do we know that 20 years later these people and their kids are going to explode? there was some medication to help with morn9ing sickness, that thing ended up making all these screwed up babies...
cloning extinct species - why? the world gets on fine without them, its natural to species to die out etc.
altering humans genes for sickness - i'm against that too. Again, what happens in 20 years time? will everyone have down-syndrome genetics poping up because those people who were modified have gone and reproduced, and they missed a spec of the gene or something?
custom-built people - thats sick and disgusting. I would rather be ugly and stupid than perfect due to cloning. I think its selfish of the parents - the way they bring up a kid should play more of a role in who they are than some doctor in a lab.


So, I think its stupid. No reasons that I can think of which are for the greater good, mostly just for petty reasons such as 'we want a smart kid' or whatever...

We also dont know nearly enough about it, maybe in 2000 years when we know much MUCH more about how it all works and have much better technology to handle it... but still... if we dont know enough we cant be sure as to any side effects 20 years later on etc.

The only place I would currently accept it is if it is done on animals in secure labs to find out how the technology works, any possible things it will do later on etc. As soon as you get people releasing genetically modified animals out into the genetic population you ahve virtually no controll what so ever over anything that happens from then on.

[Romanov77]

I don't think people have the right to "play God."



I think that we should launch a couple nukes at the "Heavens"... then we'll see how allmighty he's :g laugh:

Seriously, religion should have NO CREDIT at all in these matters.
Maybe ehtic, but NOT religion.

[disjuku]

I agree there, but the term 'play god' isnt used in a religious way I dont think... its used more like... 'play nature' sort of thing lol

[quetzalcoatl5]

I don't see any difference between cloning and artificial insemenation. I think its perfectly fine.

[disjuku]

hmm, isnt artificial insemination where they just stick the spem into the egg without the need for sex?... thats just giving reproduction a hand, but still essentially doin the same thing, cloning is messing much, much deeper

[Aj Windshadow]

Well about playing god ,well we already are ....
cloning is pretty much alright when it comes to organs ( if anyone opposes it i'll burn him at stake ppl are dying u know !)
cloning ppl is basically bad
artificial insemination is NOT like cloning its more of selecitive breeding thats like cloning
religion sucks ,ethics rule
ask a priest a fu*king Q and he keeps blabing how the world is so wrong
no matter what those hypocrite b*tches do!!

[ArPharazon]

hmm, isnt artificial insemination where they just stick the spem into the egg without the need for sex?... thats just giving reproduction a hand, but still essentially doin the same thing, cloning is messing much, much deeper

Essentially, cloning is nothing more than reproduction, with the sole difference of one parent/gene-pool instead of 2. As such, I'm not against cloning, as long as they don't use it for inhuman practical purposes, such as organ-harvesting, selling your clones as slaves, and other things like that. Those things can be done with normal children too, does that mean we should forbid all forms of reproduction? If that happened, all humanity would be extinct within about 100 years. Not that that's a bad thing, of course... but most people think otherwise.

[Laff]

I think that we should launch a couple nukes at the "Heavens"... then we'll see how allmighty he's :g laugh:

maybe i should start a poll called "incredibly stupid or incredibly genius"...

yes let's launch nukes towards the stars...assuming they don't somehow detonate before leaving the atmosphere, do you know how long it would take to reach another star system?

[Kingcrazygenius]

( if anyone opposes it i'll burn him at stake ppl are dying u know !)

That is a lie and you know it. No one has died since 1972.

[BraveLiver]

It can be good. We can clone vital organs so transplants have no waiting lists. We can clone food for poor countries. We can clone ourselves and do no work EVER!

It can be bad. We can clone entire armies a la Star Wars.

[Nio the Namless]

religion sucks ,ethics rule
ask a priest a fu*king Q and he keeps blabing how the world is so wrong
no matter what those hypocrite b*tches do!!
And they call me biased when I haven't said a f*cking thing. I said "play God" I put "" around it because I didn't mean litterally. And for your information ethics is in religion. Or at least any realigion worth its creed. I don't know. Perhaps you have had an experience with a dumb/bad preist. Or perhaps a church full of morons. But that doesn't make every single person with a belief in some higher power an idiot.


and for your information not all religious types think the world is a crumy place.

[Bullroarer]

Although I am a religious person, I find cloning wrong for one important reason. I believe every child has a right to both a mother and father. Call me what ever you wish, but that is one tradition I hope is never forgotten. Nothing beats creating children the old fashioned way.

[KrewL RaiN]

I dont like the idea of it, its like playing god. We should not play with life

[Dragolas77]

Says the death knight... -_-

[Raistlin Majere]

I dont like the idea of it, its like playing god. We should not play with life

Lets play with death then!

Nothing beats creating children the old fashioned way.
You are a wise man Bullroarer. :y-thumbsu

We can clone food for poor countries.
Great, now their already huge, cramped population can get even bigger.
:y-thumbsd
NOT like cloning its more of selecitive breeding thats like cloning

**** that, bring back natural selection! :bigclap:

I really don't want a bunch of scientist making the "super human."
I agree, do you know how many times they have messed up just to perfect cloning? They did not nail it the first time around.

I think The quote by Malcolm in Jurassic Park has good meaning

"they were too busy asking if we could, when they should have been asking if we should."

[Kingcrazygenius]

For those of you who don't want a super human, watch Gattaca (or however the hell it is spelled).

[Raistlin Majere]

For those of you who don't want a super human, watch Gattaca (or however the hell it is spelled).

Gallactica?

[Kingcrazygenius]

No, Gattaca. G, A, T, and C are the first letters of the four compounds that make up DNA.

[PantherDen]

i watched that movie, it's quite interesting. although they have that stupid ending where it's "heart/effort/caring > physical perfection" which just ruins the whole thing.

[Kingcrazygenius]

i watched that movie, it's quite interesting. although they have that stupid ending where it's "heart/effort/caring > physical perfection" which just ruins the whole thing.

Actually I think the whole message is that effort supercedes natural gifts.

[Glurin]

Cloning has some areas where it shows great potential, like for transplants and such. But I think it raises way too many questions right now. Ethical and otherwise. And I can easily see us becomeing to dependant on it, resulting in the copy of a copy of a copy situation.

I say ban cloning of humans, but maybe keep the option open for body parts and maybe food products.

[Glurin]

I disagree Glurin. I think cloneing of humans should be allowed. That way we can perfect the human species by cloneing the good and not cloneing the bad. Think of all the wonderfull things we could come up with if we had a room full of einstiens working together.

Hey, wait a minute. Who are you? :y-huh:

[Exar]

Cloning is fine, except for one small problem:

See, DNA sort has it's own clock. Your cells can only reproduce so many times, and at that point, your body simply begins to break down on its own, as it's no longer able to repair itself. When you clone someone, you're taking that DNA that has already done some of its alloted reproduction and making a new being out of it. The result is that the age of the original at the time of cloning is subtracted from the life span of the copy. Thus, the clone always dies young. This is why all those problems kept arising with all the animals they cloned.

If this wasn't an issue, I would be fine with it, as long as it's used responsibly. However, unless we can work around it, it creates a barrier to the science as a whole.

[mojojojomo]

I think a distinction needs to be made between full human cloning, and the cloning of important organs to save lives. Of course all the problems need to be worked out, such as premature aging, but i would rather have a person who is going to die today live for 20 more years and then 'explode' than otherwise.

Cloning food for poor countries is ******ed. The world already produces enough food to feed itself. People are just to lazy, malicious or **** in some other way to distribute it properly. Genetically modified food is a far better solution anyway, as it can be used to produce pest/climate change resistant crops, which is one of the main causes of fammines, but it raises issues all of its own.

Oh, does stem cell research come under your definition of cloning, Bullroarer?

Great, now their already huge, cramped population can get even bigger.


Yes, because Africa, with a population of 750million and dropping, is surely an over crowded land mass. Europe has approximately 500 million people, and less than half the space that Africa does. Russia, too, only has a population of 270million (declining by 700 000 a year) and as a singular country is only marginally smaller than Africa.

[Bullroarer]

By cloning I meant creating sentient animal or human life.

[piggman]

...hmmm...not sure where i stand

[Raistlin Majere]

Yes, because Africa, with a population of 750million and dropping, is surely an over crowded land mass. Europe has approximately 500 million people, and less than half the space that Africa does. Russia, too, only has a population of 270million (declining by 700 000 a year) and as a singular country is only marginally smaller than Africa.

Take into account not all of africa is habitable. nor is the rest of the world.

[Gun50000]

Cloning, eh? Well... I once made a report on it... Ethically, it's hard to say you can and refute all the ethics. Religion though, that can easily be beaten back. I mean, more easy that a fight where one contender has a flower and the other has a crowbar. I don't think you can say "We should clone everything... but full humans." Humans are part of all animals, don't forget.

But, in this case, I'd have to go with my default: As long as all parties (only the ones directly involved, however) are okay with it, then it's okay.

[Desert_Eagle25]

Cloning livestock could be good for 3rd world countries.

Otherwise....it's "blah". I say no thanks.

BTW: I say YES for stemcell-research though.

[mojojojomo]

Take into account not all of africa is habitable. nor is the rest of the world.


Trust me, the apparent over crowding of the planet is a fiction. At present, the world's population could be contained within Iberia, and still live in relative comfort.

[disjuku]

Well about playing god ,well we already are ....
cloning is pretty much alright when it comes to organs ( if anyone opposes it i'll burn him at stake ppl are dying u know !)
People die, thats life, its natural, helps to a degree to keep the world from over population!
religion sucks ,ethics rule
ask a priest a fu*king Q and he keeps blabing how the world is so wrong
no matter what those hypocrite b*tches do!![/quote]
Think you could please try to keep some maturity in your posts? keep it a debate rather than an argument...

[/quote]Essentially, cloning is nothing more than reproduction, with the sole difference of one parent/gene-pool instead of 2. As such, I'm not against cloning, as long as they don't use it for inhuman practical purposes, such as organ-harvesting, selling your clones as slaves, and other things like that. Those things can be done with normal children too, does that mean we should forbid all forms of reproduction? If that happened, all humanity would be extinct within about 100 years. Not that that's a bad thing, of course... but most people think otherwise.[/quote]
Reproduction uses two people for a reason, to get variation, get stronger genetics, natural selection, all that stuff, using one persons genetics to create another them is just pointless. Think you have been watching too many sci-fi movies... people are not against cloning because its going to be used to create super-humans with no emotions for use as slaves or whatever.

It can be good. We can clone vital organs so transplants have no waiting lists. We can clone food for poor countries. We can clone ourselves and do no work EVER!

It can be bad. We can clone entire armies a la Star Wars.
organs - just make people to kill them and rip their lungs out? fun.
clone food for poor countries - is there a food shortage in america/all the other wealthy countries? much easier to ship them a boat full of crackers.

Although I am a religious person, I find cloning wrong for one important reason. I believe every child has a right to both a mother and father. Call me what ever you wish, but that is one tradition I hope is never forgotten. Nothing beats creating children the old fashioned way.
I was thinking that myself before. How would any of you like to be a clone, made in a test tube from a hair of someone who died 50 years ago? hmm

Great, now their already huge, cramped population can get even bigger.
yeah, I forgot about that, many of the 3rd world countries are like that due to over population, bad levels of hygenee etc (such as africa I think... they believe that to cure AIDS you have to have sex with a virgin... *cough cough*) Many things they should fix up before cloning chickens for food. and besides, normal chickens can reproduce fine on their own.

Trust me, the apparent over crowding of the planet is a fiction. At present, the world's population could be contained within Iberia, and still live in relative comfort.
or everyone stuck on stewert island with a metre of room each or something...... the thing is that people need room to produce food, handle their waste and house them too. And also, dont forget about what is currently needed to support people, oil isnt going to last forever etc. But still, with over population, its just going to get bigger and bigger until something has to give.

[Nio the Namless]

Trust me, the apparent over crowding of the planet is a fiction. At present, the world's population could be contained within Iberia, and still live in relative comfort.
Maybe you would like to live in a cramped space like that, but not me

(this is ingnoring the whole energy (not food) resourses issue anyway. American especially need to use less precious minerals and whatnot)

[Canadian Tire Money]

umm. . . unless you like having ten room mates, then you can't really put the entire worlds population in one spot,mr.mojojojojojojojojomo

and i'm only talking about 1.? billion in china at the moment :)

cloning. . . this is medical ethics, where it is ethical not to tell a father that he isn't the dad. so yes, brutally ****** a patient would also qualify as ethical in the medical field. cloning sounds like flowers and lollipops to some of the things they do.

[Aj Windshadow]

Sorry about that, mostly as im on the brink of being a scientist myself i really dont believe religion or worldly politics should play a role in science.
( a whole new discovery about the universe and its evolution was about to be stopped due to bad relations between two countries sheesh! )

Anyways I firmly think that people should'nt be waiting for organs when we can get them very easily by stem cloning

Oh and pigs organs have a special sugar coating on it which makes them unusable but cloning removes it at the time of production so its been tested extensively.

How would you feel to be stuck on a wheelchair all your life or die in a few months cause a damn priest thinks its spoiling the world??

But ethics plays a role in science so we dont repent later when catastrophie occurs

If we had thought about the ill effects of nukes vs its use as an energy source it would'nt have been developed very well ( ethics just wasnt there at that time )

And btw most americans and other ppl in developed countries dont understand how bad the situation is in 3rd world coountries about hunger and population explosion.

we all know the downsides of having cloning of complete humans it could destroy the foundations on which our civilization is based
ppl cant be arrested even if their DNA is found etc.

[mojojojomo]

Maybe you would like to live in a cramped space like that, but not me


Never suggested that. It was simply used to put things into perspective. Of course it would be cramped, and probably very smoggy, but if one was willing to turn the entire Iberian Peninsula into a super city with lots of tall appartment blocks, it could be done. Similarly, the food issue could be solved if one was willing to dedicate all of North America to agriculture. Both things will never be done, of course, but they are interesting concepts, none-the-less. The energy issue is more complicated, but if the world can ditch its addiction to fossil fuels, as well as become more cost effcient, things should start looking up.

And har-har CTM, yes my name is long and ******ed. In my defense, i made it when i was like 14, and didnt understand forums. I was hoping to somehow transfer the activation email to another account, which never received such an email. Now i cant be bothered changing it.

[mulratt]

let's separate cloning from bio-engineering/gene modification plz?

Cloning is just making the perfect replica.

For those crying about playing God, well that argument by itself doesnt make sense if you believe in God. If we can clone, it is because God has allowed us to. Else we would be undermining God, and God is not all powerful after all if some measly scientists can undo God's will.
Besides, people used to argue that against surgery and even medicine I think (unless it had some religion behind it). So dont go to the hospital then, cuz saving your life is interfering with God's design.


Cloning's problem is for all the confusion. You have two Jims now, and both of them expect to continue on with their lives. But there's only one family/career/past for both Jims, only one can be satisfied.
Both Jims have the same capacity to feel pain when disallowed to pursue the life they think they were leading. It's all a lot of suffering for the clone (or the real Jim). Then again, who can we say is real? Just because the original Jim's molecules were assembled before, does that make the clone less him? To me, human value is in our thoughts and emotions, and the clone feels them as authentically as the original Jim.

So for those reasons, cloning is no good.

[Kingcrazygenius]

It's not like you can stick a person in a tube and make a replica of them right away. When Jim is cloned his clone will be a baby. So unless Jim is also a baby all that stuff about living a life and crap goes out the window.

[Nio the Namless]

I would just like to add that culture, politics, religion, society, law, and a whole mess of groups of people have prevented the advancement of technology.....



learn some history


peace out

[Raistlin Majere]

I would just like to add that culture, politics, religion, society, law, and a whole mess of groups of people have prevented the advancement of technology....

Damn straight.

If it was not for that, my first world domination attempt would have succeeded and all of you would be worshipping me. :y-annoyed

If we did not have the Dark ages, some say that we would have colonies in other solar systems by now.

[mulratt]

It's not like you can stick a person in a tube and make a replica of them right away. When Jim is cloned his clone will be a baby. So unless Jim is also a baby all that stuff about living a life and crap goes out the window.

So we're not talking about perfect replicas like in that Arnold movie then....
I have no problem with that then. The baby clone is a different person and if nurture is influential, will turn out to be significantly different in personality.

I dont know why people would want clones, but essentially there's nothing wrong with it. Like someone already said, it's the same than normal reproduction but without the gene pool of two people. If you think conserving a gene pool is wrong, then you'd also support laws that force interracial babies and things like that.

Besides, the first organisms cloned themselves to reproduce.

[Nio the Namless]

If you think conserving a gene pool is wrong, then you'd also support laws that force interracial babies and things like that..
maybe I do...


seriously though that doesn't make that much sense. I know what you mean but as an agrument it kind of falls flat. There would not be as much diversity in life today if it wasn't for the advent of sex...


see its not all bad...


:y-wink3:


wait a second was that statment out of character

[mulratt]

Not saying that sex is bad. There's just nothing inherently wrong with cloning.

[Avi]

let's separate cloning from bio-engineering/gene modification plz?

Cloning is just making the perfect replica.

For those crying about playing God, well that argument by itself doesnt make sense if you believe in God. If we can clone, it is because God has allowed us to. Else we would be undermining God, and God is not all powerful after all if some measly scientists can undo God's will.
Besides, people used to argue that against surgery and even medicine I think (unless it had some religion behind it). So dont go to the hospital then, cuz saving your life is interfering with God's design.


Cloning's problem is for all the confusion. You have two Jims now, and both of them expect to continue on with their lives. But there's only one family/career/past for both Jims, only one can be satisfied.
Both Jims have the same capacity to feel pain when disallowed to pursue the life they think they were leading. It's all a lot of suffering for the clone (or the real Jim). Then again, who can we say is real? Just because the original Jim's molecules were assembled before, does that make the clone less him? To me, human value is in our thoughts and emotions, and the clone feels them as authentically as the original Jim.

So for those reasons, cloning is no good.

I agree with you that using God as an argument AGAINST cloning/bio-engineering is pointless. Similarly, as you said, God has given us the intelligence, technology and initiative to clone. However, for the sake of science, it's usually best to leave religion and God out of the equation all together.

Like another person said, religion has oppressed science for thousands of years. Galileo was oppressed, Darwin didn't include man's evolution in "Origin", but eventually included it in "Descent", Rutherford was oppressed - not to mention the countless scientists branded as heretics because they didn't follow what the Church said.

Consequently, I support cloning and bio-engineering for two reasons:

1. to better understand illnesses like Cancer
2. to develop organs that humans can use for betterment.

About the issue of cloning a human being, I also support that. I understand that some instincts are inherently present in humans at birth (all human babies, regardless of ethnicity or language, have very similar "baby-talk" - it's an intrinsic aspect of our nature). On the other hand, attitudes and other many other actions are "learned" from those around us.

Consequently, the clone of Jim is not Jim - it's only a biological clone, not a clone of Jim when he's 28. Is the clone a human? Sure, the clone has the same organs, same chemicals, same nervous system. Will the clone experience what Jim experiences? Who are we to know - by preventing cloning to happen entirely, we'll never know. Will the clone experience love, happiness? I don't see why not - considering that love and happiness are "emotions" triggered by "hormones" - both easily decribed as chemicals and reactions.

And we are no position to say the clone is a clone, and Jim is a Jim. Don't forget, cells fundamentally reproduce by cloning. And if you support the theory of evolution, then all animals descended from simpler organisms that reproduced ENTIRELY by cloning.

As for playing God - I support it. Suggesting that bio-engineering is ethically wrong because we are playing God with life - well we've been playing God with many lives. Animal testing is also playing God. (let's shoot this monkey in the face with mace and see what happens!)

I don't expect everyone or anyone to agree with me. But it's also pretty clear to me that religion does little to advance science - instead, religion often cripples scientific advancement. So I say, leave religion, God, and religious ethics out of the equation.

Support cloning for it's scientific purposes - not religious.

[Nio the Namless]

I agree with you that using God as an argument AGAINST cloning/bio-engineering is pointless. Similarly, as you said, God has given us the intelligence, technology and initiative to clone. However, for the sake of science, it's usually best to leave religion and God out of the equation all together.

Like another person said, religion has oppressed science for thousands of years. Galileo was oppressed, Darwin didn't include man's evolution in "Origin", but eventually included it in "Descent", Rutherford was oppressed - not to mention the countless scientists branded as heretics because they didn't follow what the Church said.

WHAT WITH YOU PEOPLE! As far as religionis concerned, ther is NO ARGUMENT. Jesus (or any other book I am aware of) never said, "And thou shall not clone." Some people simple don't like the idea. Its not because God said so. They may believe God would say so. There are trying to say it just doesn't seem right.


And now lets move on testing atom bombs on this unknowing African country!

EDIT:
Don't they already know that Jim A will be different from Jim B, from animals studies? (and animals tend to be affected by there genes a bit more)

EDIT2:

Please think about ALL the people that prevented advancements in science. There not ALL religious.....

[mulratt]

Avi, some atheists view religion as the contrary of science, as in religion is man's invention to explain everything that he cannot explain by science.

The problem is that we've made this categorization of science vs religion. In reality, theists are also seeking knowledge. We should categorize it more as empirical studies vs thought (because theists dont rely on what they see, but what they can think of). I would then place Plato in the thought category too.

But still, thiests havent proven anything. Like I said in every thread on religion, since we havent proven the existence of God, it's ok to have you worship God, but not for you to affect others' lives based on sumthing not proven. In the same manner, ppl cannot use aliens in an argument, cuz their existence isnt proven either.
So yeah religious arguments should be kept out.

It just doesnt seem right isnt an argument either. It just comes from a fear of change.
Surgery didnt seem right probably. Neither did the automobile.

[Kingcrazygenius]

But the automobile IS evil! Can't you see that!?

[Nio the Namless]

But the automobile IS evil! Can't you see that!?
Ya we fought a war over fueling it!

[perfectgamer911]

It can be bad. We can clone entire armies a la Star Wars.

no we can't because every clone has it's own mind and you can't force them to fight in the army, only with military service and then almost everybody has to join. besides why do we need large army's to invade even more country's for no reason at all.

[perfectgamer911]

as for playing god, maybe when your cloning that's not an argument, but when your doing it for organs then it is. you clone someone for organs and then what kill him/her for its organs because you need them, that would be killing someone. and as it says in the bible "thou shallt not kill"

btw: sorry for the double post.

[mulratt]

Who says you're killing them?
Cant you just reproduce the organ itself since you have their blueprint?
Why do you need for a body to begin from birth to generate these organs if you can just produce the cells you need?

[perfectgamer911]

maybe but I don't think the cells will work right or at all, because theres nothing supporting them so they dont have a reason to work.

[Canadian Tire Money]

it isn't hard to strip someone of having a mind of their own. . .

and about playing god, why not play god?

[Kingcrazygenius]

I'm pretty sure the bible says to act like Jesus, so playing God must actually be a good thing.

[Canadian Tire Money]

it is a natural progression. kids play doctor. . . doctors play god.

simple.

[Kingcrazygenius]

And ralfwarg wins the toffee!

Good show! :y-thumbsu

[Bullroarer]

And who would be the flesh and blood guardians of a clone? What if a male clone grows with no mother and a female clone with no father? As for culture, politics and religion holding back science. Sometimes culture, science and politics excel science. And how exactly would a clone feel being a clone? And what if we humans abuse the tech to mass produce clones for things such as war? There are too many IFs. It is not really about playing like god, it is playing with fire.

[Canadian Tire Money]

So what does God play? Kids?

no, but priests play with kids. . .

[Pretzel]

Why is it so important to clone organs. If people are supposed to die, they'll die. Human life, as been around for thousands (If not millions) of years, and Life itself has been around for millions (If not billions or trillions, I get mixed up with numbers) without cloning. Why do we find it so important? I definently think cloning is wrong, because as bullroar pointed out, the childhood will be completely abormal. Also, what about the person who got cloned. I sure as hell wouldn't want some imposter of me running around.

[Warpblade]

Why is it so important to clone organs. If people are supposed to die, they'll die.

"Mr. Pretzel, your mother will die if she doesn't recieve a new heart. Unfortunately, we don't have any heart donors."

Will your reaction be the same then?

[mulratt]

Why is it so important to clone organs. If people are supposed to die, they'll die. Human life, as been around for thousands (If not millions) of years, and Life itself has been around for millions (If not billions or trillions, I get mixed up with numbers) without cloning. Why do we find it so important? I definently think cloning is wrong, because as bullroar pointed out, the childhood will be completely abormal. Also, what about the person who got cloned. I sure as hell wouldn't want some imposter of me running around.


Wow revives an old thread for that.
Ok well we changed the definition of the clone from an adult to a baby. That is Jim's clone starts anew as a baby without Jim's memory. Nothing wrong with that I argued.

Now onto your statement? Why clone organs?
Because we love or fellow human beings and dont want them to die. For the same reasons we have medecine. For the same reasons I tell my sister not to play in the road. Is telling her so playing God, because if she was going to die it was her destiny?
ABnormal children heh? What about those people with prosthetic limbs or transplanted organs or hearing aids? I guess they feel really bad huh?
Better leave them to their fate/

[Desert_Eagle25]

Cloning a human serves no purpose, and is cruel to the clone itself - because it IS a human as well. AS a human, I personally would never want to be created in such a ...fashion.

The use of Stem-Cells to CREATE donor organs is MUCH better on the otherhand.