Human Cloning

[shr0olvl]

In one of my classes, I am forced to do a 3-5 page paper taking a side on some subject. So I picked 'human cloning' and decided to be on the con side. So I wanted to ask you guys what yall think about the cloning of humans and wether your for it or not. Then tell us why you are or not. This could easily turn into a debate? :)

[QuattroMan]

I love to clone Bush,i am not joking!!!

[scottie300z]

Not:
1. Overpopulation
2. There are already starving people in the world
3. Would the clones steal your soul? or have one at all?
4. If one commits a crime dna evidence would be useless
5. What if it was used to make 1 large army to take over the world
6. your clone would steal your girlfriend.

[Niko_Fx]

I love to clone Bush,i am not joking!!!

Dumb and Dumber? :)

["Clevor" Angel]

Some cons are that we could become overpopulated. The clones don't usually live long, and please correct me if I'm wrong but isn't it expensive?

[Egg Nog]

I love to clone Bush,i am not joking!!!

Twice as funny. ;)

[PerfAdv]

Clones might be bred for organs
Clones with/without soul would be an automatic underclass
Clones might be used for sex ~ cloned Pamela Andersons and like populating entire Red light districts
Clone armies - no family, no connections, just a killing machine

[crisis]

The clones don't usually live long,
I think thats replicants.:D
If we are to clone we must remove morality. And religion (there is always an upside).

[Rockefella]

Lol, my friend Alex JUST finished a 5-page paper about the exact same topic, and chose the con-side as well.

[shr0olvl]

Lol, my friend Alex JUST finished a 5-page paper about the exact same topic, and chose the con-side as well.

Haha, righteous. Can you tell him to copy it and then send it to me via email? :)

[my porsche]

I love to clone Bush,i am not joking!!!
i think he means more people more chances to score? :p

[Bob]

Not:
1. Overpopulation
2. There are already starving people in the world
3. Would the clones steal your soul? or have one at all?
4. If one commits a crime dna evidence would be useless
5. What if it was used to make 1 large army to take over the world
6. your clone would steal your girlfriend.
1. So we should eliminate sex too?
2. Saame as one. Actually, we could always eat the clones...
3. Do you have a soul?
4. point
5. Clones are not exact copies, those are3 replicants. They would take a long time to grow up still. The logistics of a 'clone army' make it easier to do it the old fashioned way and just brainwash the masses, rather than raise millions of kids for 18 years.
6. My clone would steal your girlfriend :p

[scottie300z]

1. So we should eliminate sex too?
2. Saame as one. Actually, we could always eat the clones...
3. Do you have a soul?
4. point
5. Clones are not exact copies, those are3 replicants. They would take a long time to grow up still. The logistics of a 'clone army' make it easier to do it the old fashioned way and just brainwash the masses, rather than raise millions of kids for 18 years.
6. My clone would steal your girlfriend :p


1. You dont take away rights of people, but you dont do things to make the situation worse.
2. then clone animals, but this is about humans
3.I dunno, the point is, is that the whole soul thing is something to think about.
5. To brainwash the masses wouldnt necessarily be easy either. It would take some time as well. And why not do both? You would still most likely need more people to do that when brainwashing the masses
6.your clone can have my seconds:D

["Clevor" Angel]

Clones might be bred for organs

If we combined Cloning with Stem cell research (which is a good thing!), we could clone just one organ or even a small patch of skin, bone, or muscle tissue. This would eliminate any waiting line for donor body parts.

[PininfarinaPIMP]

Im personally against it. I think human cloning would lead to cloning ignorant assholes like Bush. It would also lead to, i think, more conflict because since people are only a syringe away your could produce soldiers by the thousands, like in Universal Soldier. There are some up sides to it, things could be managed by cloned humans, harvested by cloned humans, and cleaned up by cloned humans...but then they could revolt because of shitty conditions, work hours, ect....

[Bob]

1. You dont take away rights of people, but you dont do things to make the situation worse.
2. then clone animals, but this is about humans
3.I dunno, the point is, is that the whole soul thing is something to think about.
5. To brainwash the masses wouldnt necessarily be easy either. It would take some time as well. And why not do both? You would still most likely need more people to do that when brainwashing the masses
6.your clone can have my seconds:D
Didn't mean to deny your points, just wanted to point out the other sides of each issue
1: I do believe in cloning for organs, as was said in this thread. It would be a huge advance in medicine.
2: The energy to make a clone far exceeds the nutritional value of one. They don't taste good anyway ;).
3: It is a personal thing, people should not be allowed to impose their povs on others, so let each person decide whether they want themselves cloned or not
5: Hitler, Stalin, Churchill- any leader who can get his people to die for their country is 'brainwashing'. It would be immensely more difficult to make, feed, and train a 'clone army'. As of now, mass cloning is impossible, and even in the future, it would be easier to adopt :p.
6: Always better the second time around ;)

[PininfarinaPIMP]

Im all FOR stem cell research, id give myself, or my child, up for it if it could possibly save the lives of millions...

[scottie300z]

Didn't mean to deny your points, just wanted to point out the other sides of each issue


Its cool, i understand, its an open debate.

1. cloning organs is different then cloning people.
3. if allowed, it would be a you have the money, then you can have a clone thing.
6. Not after me:D (just took that tooooo far)

[PerfAdv]

If we combined Cloning with Stem cell research (which is a good thing!), we could clone just one organ or even a small patch of skin, bone, or muscle tissue. This would eliminate any waiting line for donor body parts.

Extracting Stem cells from an adult is fine IMO, but extracting from an embryo causes that zygote to cease to be.
Learn more about Stem cells (http://www.nationalreview.com/arkes/arkes200408230839.asp)

[shr0olvl]

Extracting Stem cells from an adult is fine IMO, but extracting from an embryo causes that zygote to cease to be.
Learn more about Stem cell research (http://www.nationalreview.com/arkes/arkes200408230839.asp)

You suck at the internet. ;) :D

[PerfAdv]

You suck at the internet. ;) :D
Lets see if its gonna do it again. Not reading the HTML tags!!:mad:

EDIT: Just the once :D

[m5child]

Clones might be bred for organs
Clones with/without soul would be an automatic underclass
Clones might be used for sex ~ cloned Pamela Andersons and like populating entire Red light districts
Clone armies - no family, no connections, just a killing machine

No offense to you, but it sounds awfully like what the Nazis had in mind with the Jews... no?

Cloning body parts to save a life is fine IMO, but when its cloning human beings to serve as underlings it's a whole another story; a few million ppl died 60yrs ago so that can be avoided at all costs and now having the technology to be able to do that doesn't justify it...

[QuattroMan]

i think he means more people more chances to score? :p
Colin I wish everyone were as smart as you were!Just imagine what would of happen if we did not have Push! The world would been F'd by this sand bagging mf's...GO BUSH GO!!!!:)

[PerfAdv]

No offense to you, but it sounds awfully like what the Nazis had in mind with the Jews... no?...
None taken. Exactly the point made in the NationalReview article.

Cloning body parts to save a life is fine IMO, but when its cloning human beings to serve as underlings it's a whole another story; a few million ppl died 60yrs ago so that can be avoided at all costs and now having the technology to be able to do that doesn't justify it...
I'm not for it. I agree.

[Bob]

6. Not after me:D (just took that tooooo far)
:eek: You dirty, dirty boy. ;)

["Clevor" Angel]

Extracting Stem cells from an adult is fine IMO, but extracting from an embryo causes that zygote to cease to be.
Learn more about Stem cells (http://www.nationalreview.com/arkes/arkes200408230839.asp)

I'm against abortion in every case(except rape). To me a baby is a baby as soon as the heart beats and the blood flows(2weeks after conception), BUT there are hundreds of thousands of embryos, all with shelf lifes, that were created for artificial encemination, most of which wont be used and the embryo will die on the shelf and will essentially be trashed. Why not use those embryos for stem cells? IF we extract the cells early enough, 7 days or less after creation, the embryo is literally just a mass of cells. Yes the cells would, if left alone, congeal and become a tiny fetus and begin growing, but on the shelf they wont get far. Any type of non-lethal stem cell extraction from adults would be great, but then what? We have to know how to use the stem cells we get otherwise it will be in vain so why resist the research? This is not the same as the Nazis testing on Jews. Yes, taking the cells from an embryo would stop it from coming to be, but is it more humane to watch it die sitting on a shelf? The article you present is slightly biased but gets their point accross. BUT the truth is that all stem cells are not created equal. Adult stem cells differ from embryonic stem cells. In truth, adult stem cells are more "stable" than embryonic stem cells. But the reason embryos are on the forefront of the debate is that they can supply MANY MANY more cells than we can get from an adult without exstensive work. Certainly a controversial and very interesting subject and this post isn't directed at you, its just stated in generality, so please don't take it personally.

"A large number of these embryos already exist. They are the product of a process called in vitro fertilization, which helps so many couples conceive children. When doctors match sperm and egg to create life outside the womb, they usually produce more embryos than are planted in the mother. Once a couple successfully has children, or if they are unsuccessful, the additional embryos remain frozen in laboratories.

Some will not survive during long storage; others are destroyed."
-George W. Bush, August 9th 2001
from www.whitehouse.gov

and a few more nuggets of info
http://stemcells.nih.gov/index.asp
http://www.stemcellresearchfoundation.org/

[PerfAdv]

With medical technology, really technology in general growing at an alarming rate we'll be increasingly forced to make choices never before faced. Biomedical ethics is an interesting field because it thrusts our moral beliefs to the forefront of technological breakthroughs. Does morality have any part in science, certainly. Does religion have a say in science? Religion does have a say in morality. It's an inescapable circle as everything is connected.

["Clevor" Angel]

With medical technology, really technology in general growing at an alarming rate we'll be increasingly forced to make choices never before faced. Biomedical ethics is an interesting field because it thrusts our moral beliefs to the forefront of technological breakthroughs. Does morality have any part in science, certainly. Does religion have a say in science? Religion does have a say in morality. It's an inescapable circle as everything is connected.

Well said. Often times though, Science is held back by religion, Copernicus, Galileo, even Einstein couldn't deal with quantum mechanics. No genius is without madness. We have to push the limit, we have to shake things up or we wont get anywere, its human nature.

[m5child]

Either way,

This was a sticky topic, which I'm sure will come up as a very important global issue in the next few years... i know its def. a hot topic here in the states, along with abortion, women's rights and especially same-sex marriages...