Skip to comments.
What's Wrong With Cloning?
MHGinTN ^
| 1/31/2003
| MHGinTN
Posted on 01/30/2003 10:24:04 PM PST by MHGinTN
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 261-280 next last
To: T Lady
How's a clone of Barbra Streisand or George Clooney grab you? A clone of Elvira,the Mistress of the Dark,or Jaime Presley could grab me anywhere they want,anytime they want.
To: Godel
A law written now to ban human cloning could be rescended at a future date, after research has perfected the methodology using higher mammals. We'd still have the niggling issue of designer humans though.
22
posted on
01/30/2003 11:31:36 PM PST
by
MHGinTN
(If you can read this, you've had life support from someone. Promote Life Support for others.)
To: MHGinTN
Science is absolutely firm on the truth that an individual life begins at conception. Don't confuse religious superstition with science.
To: sneakypete
It's not? Then when does it magically become a human life?
24
posted on
01/30/2003 11:33:20 PM PST
by
MHGinTN
(If you can read this, you've had life support from someone. Promote Life Support for others.)
To: sneakypete
There was not one stitch of religion in the essay or subsequent postings from me. Care to try another strawman?
25
posted on
01/30/2003 11:34:25 PM PST
by
MHGinTN
(If you can read this, you've had life support from someone. Promote Life Support for others.)
To: toenail
Ping-a-ling
26
posted on
01/30/2003 11:35:46 PM PST
by
MHGinTN
(If you can read this, you've had life support from someone. Promote Life Support for others.)
To: Texaggie79
My issue with cloning is that it's irresponsible. There simply have not been enough studies done on animal clones to determine if cloning affects the immune system or the body's cells in order to try it on humans.
I guess what I'm saying is, spiritual/religious issues aside, is that we don't know what the consequences are for the clone or the rest of humanity on a purely medical level, and I would hate to see some hapless people suffer because of some scientists'(like Clonaid scientists) zeal.
Plus, the courts have not ruled conclusively on things like frozen fertilized embryos following a divorce. What happens if someone can eventually clone you with a DNA sample such as a strand of hair? What rights would you have as the "original?" What if someone decides it would be sort of cool to clone great leaders... or great tyrants? Or even a celebrity? What makes you special as Cindy Crawford if there are ten Cindy Crawford lookalikes?
If someone clones you without your consent, who are the clone's parents? Your parents?
Too many medical and legal issues have not been clarified.
To: TheFilter
What happens if someone can eventually clone you with a DNA sample such as a strand of hair? What rights would you have as the "original?" One good reason not to clone.
28
posted on
01/30/2003 11:49:58 PM PST
by
Cool Guy
(In God We Trust.)
To: MHGinTN
It's not? Then when does it magically become a human life? When there is a heartbeat and brain activity.
To: MHGinTN
There was not one stitch of religion in the essay or subsequent postings from me. HorseHillary! The whole concept of "life begings at erection" is based on religious beliefs. Primarily Catholic Christian religious beliefs. Your bizarre claim that it is based on scientific fact is pure HorseHillary.
To: MHGinTN
Since it is a fact that an individual lifetime is a continuum that begins at fecundation, at conception, it is glaringly paradoxical to arbitrarily remove any age along that continuum in an effort to prove a later start to the continuum ... If a person tells you that he or she originated at 18 weeks from conception, or originated when she or he took their first breath, or originated when his or her brain first had a thought, or originated when his or her heart muscle first contracted, or originated when her or his gonads first functioned, just remember, the lifetime of every individual human BEING begins at their unique conception/fecundation and to choose some other point to believe the continuum begins is absolutely arbitrarily illogical, not based in science or truth.
OK, but now continue the continuum...
When does this person's life end?Should we say it doesn't end until every cell in their body has died? If your concept of a person's life is internally consistent, you have no other choice. Think about the absurdities that would imply. Are you comfortable with that?
31
posted on
01/31/2003 1:38:21 AM PST
by
jennyp
(http://crevo.bestmessageboard.com)
To: sneakypete
From the Ohio State Dept. of Health
2 weeks
(4 WEEKS after the first day of the last normal menstrual period)
By the 25th day, the heart begins to beat.
The human embryo is about one-hundredth (1/100) of an inch long.
Implantation began the first week and continues.
6 weeks
(8 WEEKS after the first day of the last normal menstrual penod)
The embryo is about half an inch long and has a four-chambered heart.
Electrical activity begins in the developing brain and nervous system.
The fingers begin to develop.
The embryo has nostrils.
32
posted on
01/31/2003 1:40:44 AM PST
by
geopyg
To: MHGinTN
Designer humans is a good thing. I hate to break this to you but the current system we have no is actually unnatural selection. The sick don't die we treat them with medicine and they pass on defects. The less intelligent/educated you are, the more likely you are to have kids (in general). No matter how dumb you are or how big a failure, a successful person will be taxed in order to feed you and your children. If this process continues, the human race will get more sickly and less intelligent with time. The only options are, accept this, start killing people, sterilize people, or use harmless genetic engineering to counter the effects. I think the last one is the most logical and humane option.
33
posted on
01/31/2003 1:47:24 AM PST
by
Godel
To: MHGinTN
BTTT!!!!!!
34
posted on
01/31/2003 3:04:12 AM PST
by
E.G.C.
To: sneakypete
Then when does it magically become a human life? Pete stated, superstitiously, "When there is a heartbeat and brain activity."
Your sad lack of scientific understanding makes it difficult if not futile to discuss cloning with you. But here's a simple non-scientific but logical question for those reading your assertion (can you recognize the superstitious paradox in pete's assertion, arbitrarily conveying 'human' on that which cannot be anything but human life from the beginning of its existence?): Has anything other than a human popped from a human womb nine months after the start of its life, during the course of recorded history?
35
posted on
01/31/2003 8:54:45 AM PST
by
MHGinTN
(If you can read this, you've had life support from someone. Promote Life Support for others.)
To: jennyp
You've appealed to the notion of form and function as the means to define an 'alive' human being, for any stage/age of that human. ... A good approach to the subject, though not a simple thought. It's a useful perspective to take!
More formidible minds than mine ought to address this and expound on your thoughful notion, but here's my 'first thought'.
The adult human is well adapted to living in the environment around us (outside the womb). The form and function of the complexity that is an individual human being in the adult stage are thus the defining characteristics for that age. To ask 'when do these form and function characteristics cease to define the being' has been addressed by societies, and now medical science, ever since, I suppose, we began dealing with our dead. At present, medical science uses a 'death protocol' when contemplating organ harvesting from an individual body. But it would be useful to note that the definition for 'dead' is also based on the form and function that previously defined 'alive'. That form and function notion, if applied logically to the emryo, would argue for a being present in utero because the embryo is well adapted in form and function for life at that age in the continuum. There isn't really any absurdity in such an apprroach and it would argue for protecting the individual human life present in embryonic age/stage.
36
posted on
01/31/2003 9:12:52 AM PST
by
MHGinTN
(If you can read this, you've had life support from someone. Promote Life Support for others.)
To: sneakypete
Having addressed jennyp's interesting notion, let me offer a mild apology to you. What you appealed to was also 'form and function', but it's hard to give your specious approach respect when you interject 'gonadal response' incorrectly.
37
posted on
01/31/2003 9:16:56 AM PST
by
MHGinTN
(If you can read this, you've had life support from someone. Promote Life Support for others.)
To: MHGinTN
What's Wrong With Cloning? What do we call a child born out of wedlock?
To: papagall; FairWitness; Hajman; r9etb; ethical; YaYa123; Seruzawa; Psalm 73; airborne; mombonn; ...
Ker-ping
39
posted on
01/31/2003 9:19:28 AM PST
by
MHGinTN
(If you can read this, you've had life support from someone. Promote Life Support for others.)
To: Texaggie79
If that is so, tell me exactly what is taking place in an identical twin embryo? Can one cell house two souls? If you've ever known any identical twins well, you know that they are not really "identical," despite their common beginnings.
40
posted on
01/31/2003 9:25:08 AM PST
by
r9etb
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 261-280 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson