Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Human Cloning (good Or Bad)  
User currently offlineJetService From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 4798 posts, RR: 12
Posted (13 years 1 week 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 1703 times:

Saw an interesting piece on ABC about human-cloning. The interviews included folks on both sides of the issue. The arguments from people against it were focused around the cruelty of developing babies with defects (it will certainly happen as no technology begins at 100% perfection), and also the mere fact of mucking with nature and what consequences it will bring to mankind (both from a religious standpoint and environmental standpoint). The people for cloning used the argument of advances in medicine, organ harvesting (not growing people and stealing their organs, but growing organs themselves), giving parents their own children that would otherwise have to adopt, "designer babies" (you pick the child's qualities), and a few others. What are your thoughts and where do you stand on human-cloning?


"Shaddap you!"
11 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineUA767-223 From United States of America, joined May 2001, 156 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (13 years 1 week 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 1688 times:

The more they learn about this stuff, the more they realize they don't know.

BTW, a little known fact is that identical twins have identical DNA.


User currently offlineMcdougald From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (13 years 1 week 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 1685 times:

Human cloning and genetic manipulation both give me an ominous feeling.

As more is learned about this, both first-world governments and professional societies will pass strict laws on what is acceptable and what is not. But there are many governments unwilling or unable to maintain the rule of law. At best, some of these governments will pass laws they will find difficult to enforce. At worst, the odd government might use this technology for social engineering schemes: there's nothing more dangerous than a government using all the resources at its command to pursue human perfection or utopia.


User currently offlineGDB From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 13153 posts, RR: 78
Reply 3, posted (13 years 1 week 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 1683 times:

It really is a question of regulation, not could we/should we?
Since the discovery of DNA in 1953, it's been inevitable. Same as when the atom was split, nuclear power/weapons became inevitable.
Because of all the sci-fi horror stories we've been exposed to, DNA research always brings up the cloning issue, quite rightly, but often the debate is very hysterical.
Ironically it's in our human nature, in our genes, that makes us always search out new knowledge.


User currently offlineLOT767-300ER From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (13 years 1 week 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 1666 times:

Imagine 50 people with the name Lindy!!!!! AHHHHHHHH


LOT767-300ER http://www.geocities.com/lot767/index.html


User currently offlineAlpha 1 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (13 years 1 week 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 1663 times:

It's like so many other things, like nuclear weapons, for example. Once you open up the Pandora's Box, there's no closing it. Yes, a lot of good things can potentially come out of it, like organ replacement. But what happens if another Hitler or a nut like Saddam comes into such technology, and can actually produce a "Super Races" ala "The Boys of Brazil"? It could have frightening consequences.

As for "designer" babies, that's just another example of a world where we demand everything go exactly the way we want it. I think that possibility is pathetic. That is playing with nature, when nature has done just fine on Her own for quite some time, thank yo.


User currently offlinePendrilsaint From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 685 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (13 years 1 week 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 1664 times:

On the other hand...how could an army possibly be produced in a lab...the sheer numbers would be astounding...at most a lab could produce lets say...10,000 soldiers?...A good solid nuclear weapon could do much much more damage in many respects and be cheaper.

User currently offlineTransactoid From Canada, joined Mar 2001, 788 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (13 years 1 week 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 1654 times:

I fail to see any logical argument against human cloning.

C'mon, I'm waiting. Someone tell me why it's a bad thing...


User currently offlineJetService From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 4798 posts, RR: 12
Reply 8, posted (13 years 1 week 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 1656 times:

Trans, I will tell you the arguments I've heard, none of which I necessarily agree with.

"Creating deformed humans would be cruel and who takes care of them? Certainly you can't just euthanize, because they are human afterall."

"By introducing man-altered genetics, you could open the population up to horrendous mutated viruses, bacteria, cancers or other organisms that could potentially spin out of control and introduce us to infestations and epidemics that could wipe out entire species."

(An-225 will like this one)
"Man is 'playing God' which would certainly result in a recourse or punishment from nature, possibly in the realm of the aforementioned."
(My comment) This one I definately don't buy. God gave man the knowledge to do the things he does. One of the human qualities God gave us was the ability to forever seek new knowledge and technology. One could argue that surgury is unnatural, but I don't hear anyone protesting that.

I usually don't pose these type of questions, but what was so interesting was that it was a topic that the extreme left (enviros) and extreme right (religious) were fighting against together.



"Shaddap you!"
User currently offlineSSTjumbo From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (13 years 1 week 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 1656 times:

I'm worried about overpopulation more than anything

User currently offlineL-1011-500 From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 368 posts, RR: 2
Reply 10, posted (13 years 1 week 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 1645 times:

If you were cloned, who would be the real you? Would you call the other person a copy?

Also, what if the DNA of someone was stolen from them and suddenly, clones of that person sprouted up everywhere? It would be like identity theft...what would you do with all of the copies though?



User currently offlineTransactoid From Canada, joined Mar 2001, 788 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (13 years 1 week 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 1639 times:

All the responses in this thread clearly demonstrate the lack of knowledge certain people have towards "cloning".

Cloning IS NOT like in the sci-fi movies where you step into a chamber and an exact copy of you emerges; cloning is simply replicating DNA. A molecule. That's it. The replicated DNA STILL has to begin a zygote, cells must duplicate, and the BABY must GROW. We're not talking "instant man (or woman) - just add water!"

Cloning is no different than having and raising a normal child, aside from the fact that their DNA is not original.

"Creating deformed humans would be cruel and who takes care of them? Certainly you can't just euthanize, because they are human afterall."

Where is there a connection between cloning and the creation of deformed humans? Unless you clone already deformed DNA....which would serve not useful purpose. And even at that, normal reproduction is more likely to
result in deformations.

"By introducing man-altered genetics, you could open the population up to horrendous mutated viruses, bacteria, cancers or other organisms that could potentially spin out of control and introduce us to infestations and epidemics that could wipe out entire species."

I will acknowledge that this is a POSSIBILITY when talking about genetic modification. But this is about cloning, which is the exact opposite of genetic modification...

As for the "playing god" issue, I see it in two ways:

1) For those who believe in God, this is an ability that God has given us, therefore we have every right to use it.

2) I personally don't believe in god. That alone is my justification.





Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Government And Public Polling- Good Or Bad? posted Mon Jan 7 2008 21:49:05 by SKYSERVICE_330
Cruise Ships Exceed Containership Size Good Or Bad posted Fri Oct 12 2007 13:07:09 by 747400sp
US Arms Sale To Saudi Arabia - Good Or Bad? posted Sun Sep 2 2007 20:40:36 by Bmacleod
Modern Mercenary Companies, Good Or Bad? posted Thu Aug 30 2007 14:09:38 by Zak
Armed Guards In Schools: Good Or Bad? posted Wed Apr 25 2007 23:05:36 by Blackbird
Religious Self-Segregation -- A Good Or Bad Idea? posted Sat Jan 13 2007 00:08:30 by AerospaceFan
Smacking Kids - A Good Or Bad Thing? posted Thu Sep 21 2006 22:23:53 by BA757
One-Worldism: Good Or Bad? posted Wed Jun 14 2006 03:19:18 by AerospaceFan
Alternative Medicine Good Or Bad? posted Tue May 23 2006 11:37:35 by Oly720man
Pornography. Good Or Bad? posted Sun Nov 27 2005 18:06:34 by Cosec59