Cloning, are you for it, or not? Options

[EmeraldKnight]

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

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

[onenonly101]

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

[*Kathleen*]

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.

[EmeraldKnight]

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.

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

[onenonly101]

what happens if a twin commits a crime?

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/

[EmeraldKnight]

Haha wow.. thanks!

[*NatiMarie*]

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*)

[tkproduce]

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

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.

[darkcoldplace]

sure im for cloning if it helps not hurts!

[EmeraldKnight]

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

[ComradeRed]

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.

[EmeraldKnight]

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.

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

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

But this would allow for rapid, selective, fertilization

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

??? 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?

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?

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

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

Doesnt that support my case?

[ComradeRed]

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.

[EmeraldKnight]

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

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

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

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?

[ComradeRed]

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.

[EmeraldKnight]

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

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?

[ComradeRed]

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.

[EmeraldKnight]

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

[ComradeRed]

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.

[EmeraldKnight]

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

[ComradeRed]

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!

[EmeraldKnight]

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

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

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

[ComradeRed]

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.

[EmeraldKnight]

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

Then how is that relevent to cloning?

[ComradeRed]

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.