err......notsure , itz good 4 clonin organs buh u need to kill a baby fetus i think

go research it and report back with your findings, god knows im too lazy too. i'm thinking that they only need a tissue sample and the right genes to clone an organ...but i have no evidence what-so-ever to back it up.

No, they need stem cells.

Well, I think that if your cloning, and the cloning fails, your killing 2 lives that could have been lived. Kinda like abortion.

I don't think cloning is the solution to medical needs...we can find them in other ways.

took the words out of my mouth. =]

Alot of you seem to not know how cloning works:

You take the DNA in the nucleus of your cell, hollow out the nucleus of an egg, and put your nucleus into the egg.

The egg is fertilized just like a normal egg, and a baby is born just like the normal baby, the only difference is it has your DNA.

There is nothing wrong with cloning. Cloning is the whole reason we exist. Nature reproduces by cloning. Without cloning, we would all be a single fertilized egg.

But what about cloning extinct animals? now THAT would be basically playing God, bringing something that nature deemed unfit to survive via natural selection back to life

First, it's almost scientifically impossible to extract viable DNA from a fossil.

SEcond, what's wrong with playing God?

umm... u dont want to be playing with God.... cuase noone can be or even be a fraction of God...

Nah.
We really don't want anymore people. I mean, it'll be too crowded.
Plus, some people just deserve to stay dead.

Then again, it'll be kinda cool to bring back Jesus or someone more important. Like Elvis.

- Chinkieeyedpnoi

haha, but there's no evidence that the ppl will be exactly the same.. i mean.. it goes back to the whole nature vs. nurture thing, what ppl come to be and what they do with the gift of life largely depends on their environment and opportunities presented

So realli... whats the whole point of cloning ppl if they wont be the same as the previous ones because the exactly environment and how they react to it CANNOT be reproduced

im all 4 it especially if i can clone da hottest girl out there and hav her all 2 myself

Hah. *Cough selfish cough*

Hmm...yeah, Minda, it's okay to play God, but as I said - *Realizes she shouldn't be asking Minda of all people* - how will the person feel when they're treated like a lab rat, or more importantly, how society will look at them?

The problem is that most people are so damn ignorant and stupid. They hear the word "clone" and imagine some sort of zombie aimlessly walking around. I mean, just look at half the people in this forum. They don't have a clue what cloning is - they seem to be against it for all the wrong reasons. Society will look at "clones" as non-human machines with no souls as long as these ignorant people exist and the majority of people always will be ignorant.

im against it... someday they gona get picked on... "hey that girl/boy got cloned...hes fake...hes not real." plus... cloning is not a good thing to do...cus some crazy mad scientist can get paid from weird ppls... "weird" meaning... strange ppls...who do bad stuff... like they can clone president bush...and replace him... man not a good thing to do...if they start that cloning business. imma kick their @ss

They cant replace Bush, I'm not sure if you know how cloning works.. they dont just make an exact replica of someone.. sure, they may be simlar in physical aspects, but the environment in which they grow up in plays a huge part.. its that nature vs. nurture argument..


That I agree with.. in concept I dont think its that bad, but realistically, I'd hate to be a clone

I would hate to be a clone also because people like to find things about you and expose you to degrade you. Cloning is playing God osmething that I don't agree iwth because we were all made in His image, a clone would not be made in His image because He didn't make it. Aside form that the world is already getting over populated we don't need any extra people

Can we PLEASE keep religion out of this, there are several religious debates going on already, keep religious views out please as they may contradict with others


And yes, this I completely agree with

The ppl that advocate cloning some famous celebrity or their pet or something dont realize that it WILL NOT BE THE SAME because it doesnt matter if they're the same genetically, genetics account for the entirety of a person, the environment and its influences matter a lot as well

I'm not saying that I'm going to look at them different; it's just that you know how publicized this is going to be once they actually clone the first human - that is if they do. People will know who he/she is. Also, as I said - they're just going to use him like a lab rat. I can't possibly see that as a moral thing to do. Of course, it's in the eye of the beholder, is it not?

This is my 4,000th post!

Just had to brag there, didnt you..? haha kidding, many congrats!


Yes, the lab rat part I agree with, but society as a whole will treat them, not as a human, but as an experiment, cloning, in a way, takes away a person's humanity

ok sorry, it is just that religion plays a major part in my life that is what i base alot of things off of and to debate you have to have reasons for your stance and that is one of my reasons.

Yeah people don't understand that they will not be the same. They will just look the same and have the same DNA. We had a debate like this st school and one thing that arose was that what if someone committed a crime and all they had to go on is DNA evidence and they had a clone how would they know who was guilty

Now THAT is an excellent point there, which kinda makes me wonder (off topic but if someone could answer it), what happens if a twin commits a crime?

And additionally, with cloning, the next step will be to genetically modify ppl and select the onli the desirable traits.. we'd have a Gatacca-like scenario

Twin thing I'm not sure and that is what i want to know.

Humans also go too far with something as you said making people with specific traits. Or making a specfic breed of clone made for fighting and things like that

made for fighting? what do you mean by that?

oh haha nvrm.. i see what you mean, like in Star Wars.. haha well, yes, that would be something a mad scientist could do, create a clone army with which to attack ppl, although thats hardly unrealistic (was that what you meant?)

yeah that is what i meant. Also it starts to get confusing because I don't know if i were going to recognize them as human or not. And if i didn't then why not have them be the only ones sent to die for our country, but if they were human that idea would be completely inhumane. I don't think even if they really werent human that I would say that their life didn't matter

That probably didn;t make any sense, so i'd understand if you were thinking after you read that

What? I'm very confused at what you said.. but that does bring up a very good point (that you might've just said but i didnt understand)

By cloning say multiple copies of one person, we reduce the value of the individual, and of life itself, and we cannot do that, life is precious, cloning onli undermines that idea

Yeah that was one of the things i was saying(i confused myself) because after cloning it does present the question how vaulable is one person if that person was cloned multiple times. Life then becomes one of those unimportant things that we throw to the waste lines

Haha cloning for military?! That's crazy, and that wouldn't be moral in my opinion - I mean, you're born as a clone, and your sole purpose in life is to fight for a country whose society will treat you differently? It's kind of...mean.

Oh, I did have to brag.

I know.. and it doesnt seem like they're any arguments for the cloning side.. is this topic dead?

i don't know what happens in all cases but here are two cases http://www.polkonline.com/stories/042001/sta_twin.shtml
and
http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/05/14/twins.rape.case.ap/

Haha wow.. thanks!

Hmm...cloning let's see. I don't know, it can be dangerous right because it's not really fool proof, or is it. If it's dangerous, then I oppose it but if it's not, I don't see what's so wrong with it. I mean, maybe the person who wants to clone somebody can have a remembrance of their lost one (or whatever) as the clone baby grows up. I don't know. Hmm...I'm probably not even making sense. I seriously not to knowledgeable of the whole cloning issue, I'm going back reading some of the past posts of the people. I'll get back on this (knowledge is power...*runs to gain more knowledge*)

I think people are contradicting themselves all over the place in the debate forum. One place they're arguing that war is a good thing because the "peace" it will bring and the money it generates completely outweighs the sacrifice of human lives. Another place, like here, they argue that using clones for medical experiments is cruel and wrong. Surely if one argues about the economical benefits of the war, then they should be arguing similarly for the economical benefits of cloning.

sure im for cloning if it helps not hurts!

How does it help? You cant just throw out a random statement without any basis behind it; it hurts because
a. we have too much population as it is
b. it devalues the individual
c. it lends itself to abuse

a) We do not have too much population as it is. If the entire world lived at the population density of Hong Kong, we could all fit into the state of New Jersey. If we lived at the population density of New York City, we could all fit into Yugoslavia.

Besides, cloning does not increase population any faster than sex does. A baby still has to be fertilized and developed.

b) If you really valued the individual, then you would respect the right of the individual to OWN his own genetic code--and to duplicate or alter it as he so wishes. To abolish cloning is saying that the individuals' genome belongs to the government--this devaluse people.

c) How could cloning be "abused"? As opposed to the airplane? You think the Wright Brothers should have not invented teh airplane cause Sept 11th MIGHT have happeend down the road?

"If we had a reliable way of labelling our toys good and bad, then it would be easy to regulate technology. But we don't. Anyone who concerns himself with big technology: to push it forward OR TO STOP IT-- is gambling in human lives."
--Freeman Dyson

When a government gambles in human lives, it loses more often than it wins.

Well with the current population growth we should be thinking of ways to slow down growth, cloning would onli speed it up

But this would allow for rapid, selective, fertilization

??? I suppose it could be one's own choice to clone oneself.. but that's not such a likely possibility.. but it would still devalue the individual and when society realizes that genetics can be so easily manipulated.. i mean.. what's next? selective breeding?

Well by your analogy.. anything can be abused.. so thus nothing should be utilized for fear of abuse

Doesnt that support my case?

I wrote a rebuttal to that but it was lost due to server. Anyways my main points were:

Cloning owuld probably only exist in first world countries where overpopulation is not a big deal.

VOLUNTARY selective breeding is NOT bad. It happens every day. When you're like "I think that guy/girl is cute/hot/sexy/smart/charming/makes alot of money/cool/whatever" and then breed, that IS selective breeding... you are selecting based on certain criteria.

Uhuh... so we should make more copies of the rich and wealthy?


Sure you're selecting, but there's still a fair amount of chance involved.. this is entire selective and manipulative.. i mean.. the ppl that were born genetically superior to others.. one could clone them and create a genetic elite, like in GATACCA, ever watch that movie?

I've seen Gatacca. Gatacca, Brave New World, etc. are misrepresentations.

In those situations, the GOVERNMENT FORCES YOU TO BE ENGINEERED, ETC AND DISCRIMINATES BASED ON THAT.

That is wrong.

But FORCING people to be engineered is wrong, so is ABOLISHING it. The individual owns his own genome. He should be allowed to alter it.

I think life would be more fun as an Ubermensch.

No, not in Gatacca they dont, the parents choose; but anyways... alright, so you say this would be available to mainly the first world countries.. so the ppl there could chose to clone and create a race genetically superior to the rest of the world, are you in favor of that?

Thye more the technology develops, the cheaper it becomes.

At first it will only be available to the rich, but that will change as it becomes more commonplace.

Cell phones were only available to the rich when they first came out. Now most people have one.

But if it becomes more commonplace.. that'd be more population growth, AND it'd reduce uniqueness in the human species

Well if population grows, technology would grow too... The technology would help prevent the problems associated with population growth.

As I said, there is no lack of living space on Earth.

Besides, cloning IS NOT FASTER THAN SEX. They take basically the same amount of time to produce a baby.

1. you ignored my uniqueness argument.. with the variation of the human species decreasing, a disease could potentially wipe out a significant portion of the population
2. it IS faster because though it takes the same time TO produce.. more can be conceived at the same time

Uniqueness: That's where genetic engineering comes into play. Moreover, even if from now on we all reproduced ONLY by cloning uniqueness would NOT go down, it just wouldn't go up either. So worst case scenario it stays the same.

NO!!!! You still need a surrogate mother! One woman can still only hold one baby every nine months!

Well... as technology progresses.. perhaps we wont need them as cloning becomes more widely spread but what i meant was that a lot mre could be fertilized at once and at a more rapid rate

But would you not consider it a boring world if everyone looked and were genetically the same?

1) You need a surrogate mother who's introns match those of the person to be cloned. It takes just as much time as sex.

2) Not everyone would look teh same. People would want to be different.

Then how is that relevent to cloning?

We're not cloning all from ONE prototype person... We would be cloning from many different people... and besides there would still be people who would engage in traditiaonal reproduction for the hell of it.