Hopefully, this thread hasn't been made yet, sorry if it has...

Anywhoo:

Are you for or against cloning? Why or why not?

well i kinda dont noe cuz im kinda for it for like tha cloning of organs to save pplz lives but yet im against it cuz umm its kinda against mai religion so yea i dunno

cloning is bad.. we'd all be the same ;[

I'm against cloning.
If there was cloning.. then what would be the point for the word "unique" ?



Edit//

I don't know about you guys but there's one misconception about cloning that some people make - if you clone a person, then you don't immediately get a clone of yourself at the current moment. You'll get a baby - more appropriately an embryo - that has the same DNA as you. By the time he/she/it is your age, you'll be twice that, unless of course it's a Hollywood movie.

Personally, although it may have a lot of biological and medical benefits, I feel I'm against it because of the moral issues surrounding it. It's similar to the debate over abortion... hey, that can be a new topic

I'm against it. Cloning is playing God which isn't cool.

I think I'm against it even though like tkproduce said, medically it benefits. But like Jiggapin0 said, playing God is not cool. If something goes wrong, these human clones might grow by the numbers and turn against the normal human beings. Lolx sorry, too much science fiction movies...

Cloning a whole person is virtually impossible. Our eggs aren't able to be fooled and accept the body cell that is needed to make the cloning work. Instead of an egg and a sperm, what they do is remove the nucleus from the egg and implant a regular body cell into it. Sheep and Cow embryos have been able to be fooled like this, and this is why you had Dolly the Sheep.

I think cloning an entire human is wrong. There are too many variables involved with the way you are brought up and the world around you - you can never give birth to the same person twice.

BUT I have no problem with people using their own cells to clone parts of them ... if a person is burned on over 75% of their body, I think they should be able to take their own skin cells and clone grafts of their own skin. If someone's kidneys are failing, I think they should be able with their own kidney cells clone new healthy ones. I don't find anything at all wrong with something like that. It's just when you try it with the entire human being does it get kinda tricky...

well it may be tricky now, but I can bet you they'll manage it in a few years time. So I think scientific limitations isn't really an issue here - it's the moral issues that stop it from happening

Yes, I'm sure we'll be able to find new ways for medical benefits in the future. I'm against this, even though I am anti-abortion. There's a lot of chances this won't work, as Jess (Rivendell) said. Look at Dolly - she died, and scientists still don't know why she did. Although, as Jess did say, you can't create the same person unless they're brought up the same exact way (which I highly doubt will occur). Still, think about how those people would feel when they grow up - people won't think of them as a human, and more of a machine or lab animal. I don't think that's fair to them. Why make them suffer like that?

I'm against it, for the same reasons that others have said on previous posts.

But curious minds will experiment with it anyway. How are we to stop it from happening?

If and when they are able to create successful clones of human, I think it will be an atrocity to humanity. The worse part comes down to who owns the cloned child and how he/she would be raised. A multimillion company is not going to spend millions to create a clone of anyone and give it to a family to be raised willingly. But then the family wouldn't allow years upon years of tests being done to there child potentially causing mental or physical damage. When the child turns 18, would the child be able to live out in the free-world without the nuisance of being controlled by the multi-million company. It's a lot to think about, and sure, cloning organs would help humanity in many ways, but cloning human beings could be a very bad thing.

umm... I think the basic idea behind cloning is that once the clone cells are made, they have to be placed in a female womb to develop, so they aren't that different from "normal" humans. Identical twins are a product of cloning occuring naturally.

Yes, but they'll know they're a clone anyways, and so will the people around them...

zygotes, blastulas? twins are just cell reproduction.

Ok, honestly I have always wanted a twin...yeah...sum ppl want a little brother, an older sister..wtvr...I want a twin....but I strongly disagree with clones..they have no souls..which mean they have no consiounce....which means they could kill without feeling pain or caring, not to mention, obvioulsy, I am a christian and its unbiblical.

That's wrong. A clone is just another human being that happens to have the same DNA as another person. Depending on the environment he or she is brought up in, he or she may or may not be anything like the person they were "cloned" from. Identical twins have identical DNA. A clone would just be like a twin who developed in someone else's womb (and some couples have had their babies develop in other people's wombs). Of course they're going to have a soul and conscience - I don't know what you're on about. Anyway, between us humans, less than 99% of our DNA differ from other humans. We're all slight mutations of each other. If we keep on calling clones "clones", then the appropriate name for us would be "mutants".

I'm against cloning. There are already many people in the world and its being overpopulated. Can't we be happy with the people already here? but if it's for rare animals, sure. People are killing animals and making more humans. There's just too much in the world these days.

I'm against cloning. There will be a big problem if we start cloning, robbery, education, love and more. If we start cloning this world will be a big mess.

I'm against clonign flat out. I would never believe them to be a real human being no matter how "normal" they are

I'm not against cloning! (*don't kill me!*)

When you clone, don't you just clone the genetic material? So, won't that mean that even if the genetic make up is the same, the personality and behavior will be different depending on the surroundings in the environment. So even if it has the same genetic make up, the being is still different.

As for who "owns" what, I don't think that's a wrong use of term. The person whose genes they used to create the clone will act as the parent specie, right? So, won't he or she treat the clone as if that were his/her child? There will be no "owning" of anyone I suppose, they are still human beings afterall.

And the way the clone is treated as he/she grows older, that's just society's fault for discriminating.

Wha in the world did you just say???

ok, clones have no souls?? no conscience? ok... a clone, is a clone... A clone would be made up of cells and organs and all that, just like a human... A human clone would be human.

Personally, I'm against cloning a human, beacause well, first of all, there's already a lot of people on this earth, secondly... it's just kinda weird, no? And this clone will physically be born and grow up as almost a replica of the original, but psychologically, it'll be a totally different person...

What I am for is cloning cells, like maybe brain cells for someone who's suffered brain damage or something? I dunno, but yeah...

Yes, I completely agree with you, but they will be treated differently. It's bad enough when people are bullied...think about how "different" this being is going to be.

Also, tk, how can it be natural cloning? Identical twins aren't even on purpose...they occur because the cell has been split...that doesn't mean it intentionally wanted another copy of the organism...

Back to you, Michelle, if they're going to be cloned, they'd probably be in and out of a labratory their whole lives...how aggravating would that be? Just think about how they would feel.

Granted, as Elba said, sometimes I think cloning is good because we'd be able to discover new things...still, we'd be treating that being like a lab animal...I can't see that as being moral. Heh. Furthermore, as I think I stated before, there will be other ways to test things.

There are many pros and cons against cloning. However, I am deeply against cloning.

Why? Because I believe it is imoral. How would it feel living knowing that you were some type of lab expierement? Just a project? How would you feel being pointed at and examined?

Are we as human beings trying to defy god?

exactly!!!

ok im totally against it!!! they have no souls and so where would they go when they died??? not to heaven, not to hell, THEY ARENT REALL HUMAN BEINGS!! THEY DONT HAVE A SOUL OR A SPIRT!!! Thats how God created us, and who are we to say that we can "create" people!

wtf is up with you people saying they have no souls or spirits??

Yeah...they'll still have a soul... Besides, we can't base everything off of what God thinks is right or not, you know. I'm against this simply because I'm considering how that person would feel when they grow up.

They do have souls, damn it! I'm totally happy with some people's views on why they are against cloning, but other people's views are just so damn ignorant.

Plants have been cloned for hundreds of years. Farmers and gardeners have perfected different methods of doing so. Are the cloned plants any different from the original plant? Of course not, they're clones! If there was a plant producing nice big beautiful flowers, then what stops humans from cloning it so everyone can have big beautiful flowers? "Humans shouldn't play God"?, well if you ask me, we've been playing God for a hell of a long time.



Yea, I meant the formation of twins is a totally natural and random process, while cloning is just forcing the split.

Oh okay...gotcha...

Anywho - how is it not a soul? They'll still be human...I'm just not understanding where people are getting their ideas of them not having a soul.

So, what ideas do you agree on against cloning, tk?

I'm against cloning - believe me, that's the truth. Similarly I'm against gay couples raising a kid. It will just be unfair on the clone/kid.

However, people involved in this topic and the "abortion" topic seem to slightly contradict themselves. They argue that any life has potential and therefore should be kept alive no matter what in the abortion topic but argue that the clone with a perfectly legitimate life shouldn't be given a life because it'll be hell for them under this topic.

I'll rather be a clone living in a loving family than an orphan without any family.

never really thought of it... in a fun way... it will be pretty cool... but i dont think the world needs more britney spears walking around...

but my point is that im agasint it! it be boring with everyone exctely alike...

I see what you mean about 'filtering' now... I was reading and noticed the same thing.

And I don't understand how clones wouldn't have feelings either... If they don't, they'd be a walking talking machine with... blood?

Hmm...I think they're saying that a true life shouldn't be taken away, and on the opposite end, artificial life shouldn't exist. That's what I'm getting from it. The religious people will say you can't play God, and in these two instances, you are to them, I suppose, if you create life like that or take it away without giving it a chance to walk Earth.

I don't know, I'm not really sure if there should be cloning. I don't know, maybe there are risks which can be dangerous, but I don't know. I'm confusing myself right now...I'll just stop

Let me clear things out a little. Most people under this topic are arguing against cloning because either "they have no soul" (which is a totally incorrect assumption) or "it will be tough on the clone because he won't be treated normally". The latter argument is an alright one - though I think it's still a bit off the point.

The main reason millions of dollars are pumped into the research of cloning is for medical benefits. Clones can provide missing organs or missing tissue that hostpitals are in despaerate need for. You cannot just clone an organ - you must clone the whole human, then take out the bits you want. The issues come in there. Does the clone who you've just "built" count as a human being? Is it right to develop and kill clones for the benefit of other people? I have argued that they are just the same as any other human being and the reason I have done is not to support clones, but to argue against cloning because humans should not be sacrificed for the benefit of others.

i'm against cloning
but aren't there like different types of cloning.
lie therapetic, etc..?

cloning can be bad when it gets into the wrong peoples hands.. i mean... say ... someone starts cloning themselves then training them to start killing people.. and more clones to kill more people.. its weird.. but its something to think about

even though cloning could "bring back the dead," i think it`s sick `nd wrong ... the original is always better (= that`s my stand

another misconception... clones are nothing like robots - they're "normal" human beings - it's just that have the same DNA as someone else's. Training a clone to kill is exactly the same concept as training your own kid to kill. If anyone's going to do that, having a child normally (i.e. impregnating a woman) is going to be a much cheaper way of doing so.

But it's not like they're Frankenstein's monster - they're normal humans. They're not trying to make the perfect one. They're main focus on this is to do as tk said, help for future medical studies, or if someone needs a certain organ they can't get from someone's genes other than themselves. I hope that made sense.

true but what if u have someone whose really powerful n strong.. so they decide to clone them to get their traits or whatever.... i dunno.. its odd

Ya know, a clone isnt the same person. They just look the same. Nothing more.

It's like someone getting plastic surgery to look like someone else, it won't exactly change them and won't make them goto hell. I dunno what arguments you guys have against cloneing, but they're most likely for the wrong reasons.

A clone is like a twin.

A clone is no less "holy" then a test tube baby or artifical insemination.

A clone has a soul, they just look like someone else.

*Still not getting how a clone wouldn't have a soul. It's one of God's "vessals" with the same genes as someone else.

I really dont see whats wrong with cloning..

i dunno how i feel about..i kinda need to find out more about it first...

Is someone is powerful and strong, it is more likely that he/she picked up those traits during their lifetime, rather than those traits being natural-born ones. If we clone Saddam Hussein (not that anyone would want to) and bring him up in a loving American family, it's very unlikely that he will grow into an evil dictator. Sure, he might look like him, but I think most human traits are a product of events that happen during life.

The world is so over populated now, what the heck do we need to clone for. I could see cloning for parts so to speak...like if you lose a limb you could clone an identical one so that the person wouldn't be handicapped, or internal organs as was mentioned before...but to clone people for the hell of it is something we don't need. I also wouldn't have a probelm with livestock being cloned so to keep the food cycle going...if ever the case arose that we had shortages.

Cloning may provide a physical shell, but that shell does not have a personality so to speak, so it would not be an exact replica except for the physical. You would have to learn the personality, just as we did from the time of our births

I think when people are mentioning no souls...they're trying to get across that you can clone the body, but you can't clone their mind so to speak, or what's inside(mentally).

You can't really clone just parts of the body, I don't think - maybe you can with simple things like a limb, but not with internal organs like kidneys and hearts. So you'll have to clone the whole body and then cut off the bits you want and throw away the rest. This shouldn't be a problem if clones don't have a soul.

As a matter of fact, if one could justify that clones have no souls, then it will makes things a lot easier. If they're just a physical shell with no personality, then I doubt an argument will arise. Companies will be allowed to manufacture clones and provide hospitals with human "parts" and make lots of money as well as saving a lot of lives.

However, because clones are "created" in almost the same way as any other human being, they have potential to lead a life. They will have personalities. Is it fair to use these clones the same way we use animals for experiments? Do clones have a "right" like other humans have? Some people think it is, others don't. That's where the argument lies.

You can if done properly. No need to harvest organs from an otherwise normal cloned human being.

And clones would have souls. I'm tellin ya, they're the still a human but share some genes with someone that is already alive. Still one of God's vessals, with a predetermined look.

not really, cuz ur playing wit life

we already play with life all the time. face lifts and "test tube babies" paved the way. can you elaborate what "playing with life" is?