If I had the techonolgy I would try it ;/ I'd honestly like to see if there were any significant differences between the clone and the original person. However identical twins are techinically clones? They have the exact same genetic makeup. So really I guess it already answers our question on how the environment would affect their personality.
OH WELL.
When I think of cloning, I think of the movie with Arnold Swahahoohheee, can't spell his name.
It's just wrong.
I can understand that it is an interesting subject, and if we can do this, then science has come a long way.
But let's say that you had an 18 year old daughter that died from breast cancer, you cloned an exact copy of her, how would you deal with the fact that she has an almost for sure chance of getting cancer again, and dying a young age?
Originally Posted by Kevin.
Teakwood (02-29-2012)
From what I understand, cloning wouldn't actually use eggs and sperms, as that would be artificial insemination, not cloning. Instead it would replicate other cells from any part of the body. These cells would be inserted into an egg pre-emptied of any genetic material, which would "house it", then that egg would be implanted into a willing female's body. The being which would be born from this experiment would not have a genetic mother or father, since both the genetic father and mother of the original cell could possibly already be dead. Wouldn't it be really strange to not have a parent - at all? The ethical, psychological and spiritual (religious?) implications of such deed could be disastrous. It sounds like something Hitler would want to do - find a "perfect" specimen and fill the Earth with it. *shivers* I am very much against it.
Last edited by Elektra; 02-28-2012 at 10:44 PM.
What makes you say she has an "almost for sure chance of getting cancer again"?
Yes, it can be somewhat genetic, in the sense that it's much easier to get if your family has a history of it, just because they're weak to it or whatever, but there are several outside factors that go into getting cancer. Plus, you would know to be extra on-the-lookout for it. Just food for thought playing the Devil's Advocate here. I totally understand what you're saying, but I think your hypothetical situation, even should the technology become very commonplace, is very unlikely.
I am against cloning the whole animal, when you clone something, if one thing, and only ONE thing goes wrong, the clone could be born with deformities. These deformities include organs on the outside of their body, tissue in the wrong place, missing organs, and many other things. If you clone and this happens, what are you going to do!? It is in pain, but yet if you kill it, you have committed murder!
Not only this, but who knows who will be cloned, what if another Adolf Hitler came out of cloning?
__________________________________________________ _________________________
If the cloning was only for certain cells on the other hand, I am okay with this. What if someone has AIDs and they were loosing white blood cells? Then maybe you could clone their blood cells, so the body would recognize them as its own, and put them in their blood stream.
Cloning implies an identical copy (no deformities). If cloning is invented for the small scale, inevitably it will progress to a larger scale (complete beings) - I'm against the whole prospect of cloning.
It would definitely go to a large scale if a company mastered the technique. Not sure how a patent would fit in, it would be a huge battle to patent something though.
If the hypothetical full body human clone were to be mastered and technique mastered it would be the military that would be most interested and personally I believe that is where the biggest problem would be. I am very biased towards medical use because I myself dream of being a doctor and do plan on pursuing a career in medical research so for me the idea of clones on an anatomical organ basis is what I am most interested in. Whole subject bodies not so much but cloning organs for study is what my bias would be towards. However if the military got ahold of it these clones would inherently be disposable and able to be 'made' in mass quantity, the issue really would be warfare testing. The military would love this idea for mass soldiers of war in which they simply test weapon methods, most likely biological, on human test subject clones or send out an entire army simply because they can make more later. A hypothetical perfected cloning process would simply provide a new person to subject whatever they wanted to, they would not care about the ethics they would just want the most powerful weapon and the best way to do that is to test your ideas on something or simply clone already present good soldiers so that the army would be of already well suited for war.
I agree, cloning would progress to a large scale and is an ethical bombshell more trouble than it's worth in my opinion. Even if our military refused to use the largescale cloning some company would inevitably create, the technology would spread just like nuclear weapons and we would have to live with the knowledge that somewhere sentient human beings are being cloned to be slaughtered for military/medical/science-related purposes. The whole idea sickens me.
Last edited by Tom; 03-01-2012 at 01:34 AM.
I'm not sure what I think, I'd say let us do it once and see what happens with an actual human...
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
