Women get all emotional about babies and expect an exclusive commitment. The activity is fun; the baggage that women bring is unnecessary. Cloning would allow babies without commitment to anything but the baby.
Human Cloning
- Thread starter Earthling
- Start date
Women get all emotional about babies and expect an exclusive commitment. The activity is fun; the baggage that women bring is unnecessary. Cloning would allow babies without commitment to anything but the baby.
Where would the baby gestate?
If we can ever grow babies in jars we don't need cloning; IVF/sperm banks/etc. can function as always.
If we can ever grow babies in jars we don't need cloning; IVF/sperm banks/etc. can function as always.
Mehmed100
Hunger is Distasteful
CLONE ARMY
Really though, we could put our clones in the army with (possibly) human officers, and then we could be safe from all attacks without worrying about military casualties like we do now.
Not that I would condone it but it is an option.
Death_Machine
Slaytanic Warrior
I think cloning is dangerous. I can not envision an scenario where something like the plot to The Island would not take place.
Perhaps you need to broaden your horizons and realize that fiction isn't reality?
It's the ultimate heir.illram said:
Death_Machine
Slaytanic Warrior
Perhaps you need to broaden your horizons and realize that fiction isn't reality?
It's the ultimate heir.
I really didn't want to do this, but there is always somebody out there who needs things explained.
Pro abortion folks refer to a baby in the womb as a "mass of cells". Folks like Dr. Kevorkian or the Terry Schaivo situation where people are put down is becoming more common. With the lack of respect for the sanctity of human life on the rise as well as medical technology it is very easy to conceive of a world where the plot to this fictional story could become a reality.
1984 is a work of fiction too, but I can very easily see us winding up in a similar type reality in the future a well.
SS-18 ICBM
Oscillator
CLONE ARMY
Yeah, because it's more economical for the military to grow clones, raise them, and train them rather than just training and equipping volunteers. As for the advantages of better genetic stock, advanced equipment is a superior force multiplier and probably cheaper.
Clones would, to an extent, think alike, which isn't what the military needs (I think it was the American general Patton who pointed out that if everyone is thinking alike, nobody is thinking)
Ayatollah So
the spoof'll set you free
But I can see one obvious case for it: if one of the parents has a serious genetic disease. Then maybe the surest/cheapest alternative (in this hypothetical scenario where cloning actually works and produces healthy offspring) would be to clone the genetically healthy parent.
gangleri2001
Garbage day!!!
No way man! There would be no girls left for Abaddon in a world with 2 gangleri2001s!
Ok, now seriously, why should I clon myself? What would I and my other I get from that? That's stupid
Ok, now seriously, why should I clon myself? What would I and my other I get from that? That's stupid
Well, I owe it to everyone in this thread to sum up my views on this given that I kicked off the discussion again, so anyway, first a little philosophical part:
"Issues of the Future"
While by no means I am saying I find discussion of contemporary issues boring or trivial, especially around here on OT, I often have found myself pondering as many may do why people tend to look at things only for the short term. I'm guilty of this as well, doubly so as a young man I'm sure, but part of my outlook on life says differently. So I am fairly passionate about long term programs for social justice, preserving the environment and the wealth we have today for future generations, and other such things, but that's not what we're here to discuss or for me to push views on others. The one disappointing trend that is true, at least as far as my experience goes, is that the designs of politicians, governments, and businesses are not necessarily the most far reaching, and it is true that the public as a whole will often stumble onto debate over something they could have seen coming long before - and cloning is perhaps one of these issues.
The key thing I see in human cloning, and related potential technologies like genetic engineering, robotics and artificial intelligence and so on, are that these as issues for society or politics to consider are almost entirely new on the worldscene. If we look at things like economics - what would best improve conditions for the poor, or the ever-occuring debates over secular states and political clashes with various religions - these have been part of human history for thousands of years. But I view cloning et. al. as technological issues, similar to others that made their way into everyday life in less than a single lifespan, which can tend to have far-reaching effects. The direct predecessors to look at may be safe and mundane contraceptives, and medical abortion, the practice of which still rocks politics to this day.
The discussion I hoped to bring about though, is one of foresight - whether for good or for bad, to realize that some of the issues we're fixated on now may be rather obsolete in short order. Again, while I'm not trying to bring about discussion on abortion or the similar issues mentioned, it is still worth considering the parallel of our society to the days of those pioneers of medical technology who had no clue the irreversible impact their work could have on society. Will we be the ones in effect still debating "miscegnation" and outdated ideas as history races onwards? What after all is the utility for debating some of these things that haven't changed society for decades, when in a couple of decades more for all intents and purposes artificially manipulated reproduction may be a full reality.
In the end I know many of us will be extending their arguments and positions based on their long held philosophy and beliefs, which of course is not at all a bad thing, and it's reasonably true for me as well. What has been the surprise and vindication so far of my speculation on this thread, though, is that it doesn't seem everyone's opinions on the "future issue" of cloning are at all set in stone - whom among us and society at large cares enough to set into motion future debate over the subject.
Now I can't at all promise the above was unbiased, at least not to the extent I tried to keep discussion open minded before - it was basically a summary of my thoughts on the essence of this debate. And of course the following is strictly my own opinion, again I'm already struck by many of the creative or unusual takes I've seen on this thread, but not too unexpected for our community.
I personally think that human cloning is clearly wrong, and would take efforts to prevent it from occurring at all, anywhere. I'm not at all a convinced eugenecist either and would no way be able to trust any government or organization with cloning or genetic manipulation either - so a hard ban is my answer. A large part of this ties into my greater take on transcendalist futurist views, not exactly specific to cloning, but it's simply this: I think the results of these technologies could wreak fundamental changes in human society that we're not prepared to face. People simply are not to be trusted with handling more power, on the individual level even more so. Independent reproduction, where a single adult could clone a child solely for him/herself at leisure, would really be a dynamic unrivaled by anything that has actually existed in human history and not just fiction. It's not the scariest fate that said fiction has to offer but I don't see any way that cloning would not upset society - leading to conflict and violence. And yes, I happen to believe to my own great regret that cloning or related genetic engineering actually will become much more practiceable within decades, if some other equally big issue doesn't beat it first. Simply not funding it in the US isn't going to mean that someone out there isn't going to work towards it and given everyone already accomplished with animals I have no scientific argument for why human cloning isn't possible, it's just a matter of refinement. So I'm at where I stand now and I'll see what the future may hold.
"Issues of the Future"
While by no means I am saying I find discussion of contemporary issues boring or trivial, especially around here on OT, I often have found myself pondering as many may do why people tend to look at things only for the short term. I'm guilty of this as well, doubly so as a young man I'm sure, but part of my outlook on life says differently. So I am fairly passionate about long term programs for social justice, preserving the environment and the wealth we have today for future generations, and other such things, but that's not what we're here to discuss or for me to push views on others. The one disappointing trend that is true, at least as far as my experience goes, is that the designs of politicians, governments, and businesses are not necessarily the most far reaching, and it is true that the public as a whole will often stumble onto debate over something they could have seen coming long before - and cloning is perhaps one of these issues.
The key thing I see in human cloning, and related potential technologies like genetic engineering, robotics and artificial intelligence and so on, are that these as issues for society or politics to consider are almost entirely new on the worldscene. If we look at things like economics - what would best improve conditions for the poor, or the ever-occuring debates over secular states and political clashes with various religions - these have been part of human history for thousands of years. But I view cloning et. al. as technological issues, similar to others that made their way into everyday life in less than a single lifespan, which can tend to have far-reaching effects. The direct predecessors to look at may be safe and mundane contraceptives, and medical abortion, the practice of which still rocks politics to this day.
The discussion I hoped to bring about though, is one of foresight - whether for good or for bad, to realize that some of the issues we're fixated on now may be rather obsolete in short order. Again, while I'm not trying to bring about discussion on abortion or the similar issues mentioned, it is still worth considering the parallel of our society to the days of those pioneers of medical technology who had no clue the irreversible impact their work could have on society. Will we be the ones in effect still debating "miscegnation" and outdated ideas as history races onwards? What after all is the utility for debating some of these things that haven't changed society for decades, when in a couple of decades more for all intents and purposes artificially manipulated reproduction may be a full reality.
In the end I know many of us will be extending their arguments and positions based on their long held philosophy and beliefs, which of course is not at all a bad thing, and it's reasonably true for me as well. What has been the surprise and vindication so far of my speculation on this thread, though, is that it doesn't seem everyone's opinions on the "future issue" of cloning are at all set in stone - whom among us and society at large cares enough to set into motion future debate over the subject.
Now I can't at all promise the above was unbiased, at least not to the extent I tried to keep discussion open minded before - it was basically a summary of my thoughts on the essence of this debate. And of course the following is strictly my own opinion, again I'm already struck by many of the creative or unusual takes I've seen on this thread, but not too unexpected for our community.
I personally think that human cloning is clearly wrong, and would take efforts to prevent it from occurring at all, anywhere. I'm not at all a convinced eugenecist either and would no way be able to trust any government or organization with cloning or genetic manipulation either - so a hard ban is my answer. A large part of this ties into my greater take on transcendalist futurist views, not exactly specific to cloning, but it's simply this: I think the results of these technologies could wreak fundamental changes in human society that we're not prepared to face. People simply are not to be trusted with handling more power, on the individual level even more so. Independent reproduction, where a single adult could clone a child solely for him/herself at leisure, would really be a dynamic unrivaled by anything that has actually existed in human history and not just fiction. It's not the scariest fate that said fiction has to offer but I don't see any way that cloning would not upset society - leading to conflict and violence. And yes, I happen to believe to my own great regret that cloning or related genetic engineering actually will become much more practiceable within decades, if some other equally big issue doesn't beat it first. Simply not funding it in the US isn't going to mean that someone out there isn't going to work towards it and given everyone already accomplished with animals I have no scientific argument for why human cloning isn't possible, it's just a matter of refinement. So I'm at where I stand now and I'll see what the future may hold.
warpus
In pork I trust
Why would I want to participate in a cloning experiment?
I don't think we should get into human cloning until we've spent a lot more time cloning other animals and understanding the generational effects of cloning a lot better than we do now.
I don't think we should get into human cloning until we've spent a lot more time cloning other animals and understanding the generational effects of cloning a lot better than we do now.
Perfection
The Great Head.
I don't think any of these demonstrate a clear cut lack of respect for human life, rather they show a differing view of what it is to be human and what it is to be free. Terry Schaivo and fetuses (at least arguably) lack the neurological structures that make us people. Dr. Kevorkian and assisted suicide advocates are all about freedom to choice when and how to die for the terminally ill; they aren't advocating the abandoning the notion that life is precious or that noone has the right to take yours away, only that you should have the freedom to end you own in at least some circumstances.
"The Island" type situation is cut and dry mass murder, which noone now nor in the future would likely find morally acceptable.
Nah, we're malleable by culture, but not that malleable.
Zack
99% hot gas
It would be weird and confusing. So no.
amadeus
Serenity now
Perhaps a droid to harvest for organs, but another me? As high as I'm sure demand is for amadeus2, I don't think that's going to happen.
I think organ harvesting and stem cell research would be the only really acceptable uses for cloning
Nothing in particular! This is a very relevant question!Just showing off that I know my biology (though my use of the term 'hormone' is technically inappropriate. Because the 'heels' is this!
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32110476/ns/technology_and_science-science/
article said:
I'm surprised no one mentioned the movie The Sixth Day. It has that element where your consciousness and knowledge are imbedded into the clone as well, as mentioned earlier. Its slightly more realistic (in terms of practicality) than The Island, but its still a sci-fi film.
My stance on this one is downright no. Being able to do something like this doesn't mean we need to/should do it.
My stance on this one is downright no. Being able to do something like this doesn't mean we need to/should do it.
