Skip to comments.The Ethical Dilemma of Human Reproductive Cloning
Posted on 09/04/2009 10:33:54 AM PDT by jxb7076
The first so-called DNA cloning was performed in 1972 by Molecular Biologist Paul Berg who integrated and expanded a quimeric gene - a mixture of both bacterial and viral origin. Since then, Escherichia Coli (a Gram negative bacterium that is commonly found in the lower intestine of warm-blooded animals; vegetal cloning (largely used in agronomy since the mid-1960s), and animal cloning (from reptiles, fish and amphibian) have been instrumental in paving the way to the successful cloning of mammals since 1986, which cleared the way for human reproductive cloning, leading us to the scientists who vehemently oppose the practice.....
(Excerpt) Read more at hubpages.com ...
The Ethical Dilemma of Axe-Murder
The Ethical Dilemma of Necrophilia
OK, so where are we going with this...?
A cursory look at DNA combinations as compared to computer security/Instruction_sets using prime number theories can show that we are not in control of cloning. IT IS GENETIC LEVEL BUTCHERY.
A minute change in a DNA strand during replication could yield a “non-prime” unique strand, but a demultipliable strand that looks like it but which can be cut into smaller prime ones. Hence the resulting “subject” will not be viable and die horribly.
THose getting so called “stem cells” will be at risk too of incredible complications.
We do not know the genome yet, let alone what a correct genome should look like and behave like. We do not have and probably will never have the computing power to figure enough prime numbers in the system to let alone figure and observe what is in our genome. It is mind boggling the complexity of it all.
It does not prevent scientific witches out there to make wild criminal claims and to attack, dare I say, God in the process. Just because we were given a little taste of how things work does not mean we know it all and are independent of it all.
The problem IMHO is that the populace is so scientifically brain dead, they don’t know what they are getting. Even when we develop the ability to clone humans, we need to inform people that a clone is just like a twin. And like a twin, they are still a separate unique individual with inalienable rights and responsibilities; they are not a copy that will act/behave like the “original” any more than a child acts just like a parent. People need to made aware of that and understand that a human clone is not a commercial “product”, but an individual human being.
Absolutely - therefore if the original is a relatively ‘good’ person the clone may be a social monster. IS it worth the risk?