Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 66

Thread: Is it ethical to clone humans?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    231

    Default Is it ethical to clone humans?

    Read the title.
    Personally I'm against it because of the fact that clones often suffer after being made and I don't see what the point of it is.
    Admittedly I don't know a whole lot about cloning so I'm not 100% sure about what I think about.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    923

    Default

    cloning humans is stupid and pointless...cloning is basicly getting a women to have birth to a lookalike (through an expensive process mind you) that remembers nothing that the origonal knows. they suffer from desiesies that the other one was going to have and will die sooner. (for example, you clone a guy with a 40 year old cell, he will live till hes 80, the clone will only live for 40 years)

    the only use of cloning is bringing back excint animals, or helping a speiceis out if its endangerd or threatend

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    545

    Default

    cloning humans is stupid and pointless...cloning is basicly getting a women to have birth to a lookalike (through an expensive process mind you) that remembers nothing that the origonal knows.
    Not exactly. Say two gays or lesbians want to have a child. Cloning is the only way (Or something similar). Also, a clone of a smart person will not know what they do, but it will have the same mental ability (genes for "smartness") as the cloned.
    they suffer from desiesies that the other one was going to have and will die sooner. (for example, you clone a guy with a 40 year old cell, he will live till hes 80, the clone will only live for 40 years)
    A natural child would also have a chance of having or carrying diseases. What about AIDs? It is spread through sex, so natural children have a good chance of having it. With clones, there is less of a chance, I'd think. Also, their may be a way around the life-span problem, such as 'reseting' the cellular clock.
    Overall, if clones were given equal rights (which they should be, anyways), I have no problems with it morally.
    "It may be that the universe is just one of those things that happens from time to time."
    - Edward Tryon

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    923

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Strants View Post
    Not exactly. Say two gays or lesbians want to have a child. Cloning is the only way (Or something similar). Also, a clone of a smart person will not know what they do, but it will have the same mental ability (genes for "smartness") as the cloned.
    A natural child would also have a chance of having or carrying diseases. What about AIDs? It is spread through sex, so natural children have a good chance of having it. With clones, there is less of a chance, I'd think. Also, their may be a way around the life-span problem, such as 'reseting' the cellular clock.
    Overall, if clones were given equal rights (which they should be, anyways), I have no problems with it morally.
    1) where did i say it would be stupid? what i meant if we say cloned disney, he wont be anything like him, he could be a jerk, nice, ect. he wouldnt know about creating oswald, goofy, mickey, ect. hes be an intirley new person to say.
    2) lesbians and gays can adopt, and multiple other things if they want children.

    however i looked at the aid part, cloning isnt like cartoons where they use a hair, put it in a machiene and out pops a clone, they remove the nucli from a cell, put it in a womens egg, shock it once for combining, shock it again to get it to multiply, put it in a women to "raise" it, and 9 months later a baby with the exact same genes pop out... but once again there are alternitves such as adopting, and such.

    seeing how it doesnt remember anything from the origonal, you might as well just get anoughter child, cloning shortens lives. sides there are other ways to have children without anyone contracting aids.
    Last edited by dragoniteKnight; 19th May 2008 at 11:59 PM.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Great Britain xD
    Posts
    285

    Default

    only if they get superpowers

    only joking why not its not hurting anyone

    and if it does who cares

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    545

    Default

    1) where did i say it would be stupid? what i meant if we say cloned disney, he wont be anything like him, he could be a jerk, nice, ect. he wouldnt know about creating oswald, goofy, mickey, ect. hes be an intirley new person to say.
    Where did I say the new person (saying 'it' sound discriminatory to me) would be stupid? I just said that said person would have the same genes, and with a gene for intelligence, said person would be smart.
    2) lesbians and gays can adopt, and multiple other things if they want children.
    Why not add another? I see no harm in it.
    however i looked at the aid part, cloning isnt like cartoons where they use a hair, put it in a machiene and out pops a clone, they remove the nucli from a cell, put it in a womens egg, shock it once for combining, shock it again to get it to multiply, put it in a women to "raise" it, and 9 months later a baby with the exact same genes pop out... but once again there are alternitves such as adopting, and such.
    I am aware of what cloning is. However, it still seems to prevent AIDs more effectively. Also, many people are sentimentally attached to their own flesh and blood, their genetic children. What is wrong with providing another alternative? That's what capitalism is, after all. Also, the question was the ETHICS, not simplicity. It's hard and somewhat pointless to participate in sports (not to sound offensive, I understand there are benefits, but they could also be gotten in other ways, no?), but is it unethical? I think not.
    "It may be that the universe is just one of those things that happens from time to time."
    - Edward Tryon

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    El Centro,California
    Posts
    5,543

    Default

    I'm against cloning. It's against the laws of nature if it's a cloned being. I also agree they'll be suffering after being created. Besides, playing God = bad idea.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Eastern U.S.
    Posts
    1,301

    Default

    Though I'm against it morally, cloning can lead to health benefits for organ transplants and the like. At least, that is what I heard on a show on cloning.

  9. #9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dattebayo View Post
    I'm against cloning. It's against the laws of nature if it's a cloned being. I also agree they'll be suffering after being created. Besides, playing God = bad idea.
    i agree with all of those statements, especially the last one

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Who, What, When, Where, Why
    Posts
    416

    Default

    I tink its stupid and they should stop cloning cows already its realllyyy bad for us

    Thank You Northern Lights

  11. #11
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    358

    Default

    Thinking something is stupid without knowing the exact details of the thing is stupid in itself.

    Honestly, I don't have an opinion on it yet. From what I've seen, cloning can be helpful if we wish to experience extinct animals that our ancestors so selfishly killed, or obtain healthy parts made from diseased ones. A more elaborate opinion would require more information gathering on my part first.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    270

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dattebayo View Post
    I'm against cloning. It's against the laws of nature if it's a cloned being. I also agree they'll be suffering after being created. Besides, playing God = bad idea.
    Agreed, science should NEVER go that far

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    ...
    Posts
    2,006

    Default

    I feel that cloning is wonderful ^_^ It would only 'harm' the clones and not 'parent'. But if we're gonna talk about cloning we might as well bring in genetic engineering and steam cells >_>

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    into that good night
    Posts
    10,415

    Default

    I have no moral qualms with cloning humans. I plan on heading into the field of genetics, anyway, so I look forward to learning much more about it.

    Robin Williams
    1951-2014
    "What's it gonna be? I don't know. But maybe along the way, you take my hand, tell a few jokes, and have some fun. C'mon, pal. You're not afraid, are ya?"

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    into that good night
    Posts
    10,415

    Default

    I have no moral qualms with cloning humans. I plan on heading into the field of genetics, anyway, so I look forward to learning much more about it.

    Robin Williams
    1951-2014
    "What's it gonna be? I don't know. But maybe along the way, you take my hand, tell a few jokes, and have some fun. C'mon, pal. You're not afraid, are ya?"

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    545

    Default

    It's against the laws of nature if it's a cloned being.
    I FINALLY get to use my secret weapon argument! OK then, look around the universe real fast. How much life do you see? Life is, by your definition, unnatural. Besides, plenty of organisms clone on a regular basis. Think bacteria and protista.
    I also agree they'll be suffering after being created.
    How? If cloning is improved, we might be able to do away with lifespan problems.
    Besides, playing God = bad idea.
    God, I notice, can play God all he wants.
    "It may be that the universe is just one of those things that happens from time to time."
    - Edward Tryon

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    MoreCowbell, New Zealand
    Posts
    557

    Default

    Cloning is fine, as long as everyone in the process is fully aware of what happens, and the reprocussions. Why shouldn't people be able to clone themselves? They can have children. Its just a scientific way of reproduction.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    ...
    Posts
    2,006

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Strants View Post
    I FINALLY get to use my secret weapon argument! OK then, look around the universe real fast. How much life do you see? Life is, by your definition, unnatural. Besides, plenty of organisms clone on a regular basis. Think bacteria and protista. How? If cloning is improved, we might be able to do away with lifespan problems.
    God, I notice, can play God all he wants.
    In addition, our very lives depend on cloning. It all goes down to the bacteria and binary fission. Bacteria are very important organisms you know.

    And cloning CAN be improved. That's where genetic engineering comes in. That's where we can remove/replace bad homozygous genes from the cloned organism.

    Who said that playing god is a bad idea. It never was and it never will be. It's just that the religious groups want to 'maintain their religions' by saying that it's [cloning] is wrong.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Eastern North Carolina
    Posts
    9,058

    Default

    these religious reasons are the same things that held galileo back.
    [IMG]http://i51.*******.com/dheavp.png[/IMG]
    Credit to Nuit

    Quote Originally Posted by chuboy View Post
    Quick, someone get the scientific community onto this one! A truly brilliant hypothesis that would have been insofar overlooked by every researcher who has contributed to this field of science. And it's only 8th grade stuff!
    Quote Originally Posted by Mister Zero
    I roam Johto with my partner Pokemon, Rattata, who knows Hyper Fang, Sunny Day, Rock Smash and Cut. Anyone who runs with more than one Pokemon or evolves their Pokemon takes the game way too seriously.

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Zeppelin Rules!
    Posts
    2,083

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Strants
    I FINALLY get to use my secret weapon argument! OK then, look around the universe real fast. How much life do you see? Life is, by your definition, unnatural. Besides, plenty of organisms clone on a regular basis. Think bacteria and protista.
    Nah, binary fission's rather different, given that it is subject to replication errors. Otherwise, prokaryotes wouldn't evolve now, would they? In addition to your standpoint, though, you might mention mitosis, occurring in nearly all cells of any eukaryote, practically the same process as binary fission.

    Also, it's great to see that misconceptions about cloning still abound, such as magically producing an exact copy of an individual, no matter their age. Simply put, cloning gives identical genes to another person, not conditioning or anything like that, which are pretty much the things that give anyone their idiosyncrasies, taking a lot of the creepiness out of cloning. Really, cloning someone would be a good way to determine nature versus nurture on people, which I'm certain would show nurture being much more prominent.

    Quote Originally Posted by Black Marauder
    And cloning CAN be improved. That's where genetic engineering comes in. That's where we can remove/replace bad homozygous genes from the cloned organism.
    Well, then it's not cloning. And sometimes, mixed alleles can be worse than a homozygous gene, so why not expand that to heterozygous genes, too?

    Quote Originally Posted by Profesco
    I have no moral qualms with cloning humans. I plan on heading into the field of genetics, anyway, so I look forward to learning much more about it.
    I'm rather jealous of you. Genetics is by far my favorite facet of science, albeit something I'm likely never to go into.

  21. #21
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Break glass in case of zombies
    Posts
    205

    Default

    They should clone only organs and body parts needed for replacements. That should help people not be in lines for hearts and lungs while they die. However, anywhere else is playing God.

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,731

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hive Mind View Post
    They should clone only organs and body parts needed for replacements. That should help people not be in lines for hearts and lungs while they die. However, anywhere else is playing God.
    How is harvesting organs from clones any less of playing god than using the clones for other purposes?
    You're not allowed to use pure caps messages in your signature unless you have some lower case letters too. Since this is your second Signature Violation, your entire signature has been deleted. Please read the Signature Rules.

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    ontario
    Posts
    4,085

    Default

    It's not a question of whether it's ethical or not. It's a question of whether it's smart or not.

    And something like this, is really, really, dumb.

    This is the same with cloning something like a cat, or a cow. Pointless.

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    ontario
    Posts
    4,085

    Default

    It's not a question of whether it's ethical or not. It's a question of whether it's smart or not.

    And something like this, is really, really, dumb.

    This is the same with cloning something like a cat, or a cow. Pointless.

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    923

    Default

    guys just remember that once you start altering the DNA it isnt cloning anymore, it some really big word i cant remember. anyways just a note to one of the above people saying we can use clones for organs and such, thats a bad idea, clones are still people.you might as well just walk into anoughter country and kidnap people for organs.
    (correct me if im wrong didnt they do the cloning for organ thing in the superman comics?)

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •