Cloning.

[gumby]

There are so many people who hate the idea of cloning due to moral things etc, I can understand that.
Im kinda okay with it depending on the reason.
Mr Younger, my Biology teacher, showed us some examples today as we were on the topic.
Like four of them had to do with "because we couldnt have a baby."
I understand that and Im very okay with that, you know? Whether theyre lesbian or infertile, you have the right to want a kid, you know? Love is love, family is family, and its another person who gets a shot at life.
But what goes too far in my opinion is "I want to close him so that when he grows up, I can take have his heart transplanted into mine" (the guy was going to die in about fifteen years or so from heart failure, they predicted).
That is ing wrong.
I mean... yes I understand how... if it were someone of power or position, people would say "but we need him" or something.
But ... giving s omeone life for the purpose of a heart transplant???
What the hell?
Thats wrong...
It just bothers me.
Also a thought I had about it is that if our enemies get ahold of cloning technology, uhh... Bad thing!
An army of a lot of clones?
, bad!
But anyways.
I wanted to see opinions on this.
Keep it down to somewhere below murdering each other, please.
<3

[Osama Bin Laden]

I dont caer about full human cloning for harvest of organs, as long as the clone is never concious. If they are brain dead their whole duration, then go ahead, use them for something, but if they have lives and , no.

[starscream]

Thing is, cloning ain't even a great idea for childless couples. That's what fostering and adoption are for.

[gumby]

I can agreee with... sorry, I dont know who you are, jacks raging duct. But yeah, i agree with you. If theyre unconscious all theyre life? okay. Im okay with that.
But... gah.
taking someones life for that?
No.

[Osama Bin Laden]

starscream said:

Thing is, cloning ain't even a great idea for childless couples. That's what fostering and adoption are for.

Actually it is, if you want a child that would literally be your child, with your genes and looks and attributes. Adoption is, and always will be, a great alternative, but if you want a child thats of your blood, then it isnt as great a deal.

[iusia]

I don't hold alot of value in human or life in general... afterall, if it can occur several quadrillion times before I even occured then really it's not all that special.
This leaves me at the stance of Pro-Choice, for both abortion and Euthenasia as well as enforced suicide for those who are particuarly irritating... although apparently they call that one murder. Ah well.
Annnnyway, I've always felt there's been a difference between 'A Person', and a 'A human'. Humans exist, as biological entities they've reproduced for thousands of years, and thus there will probably be no short supply of them for the next thousand years or so (but not if you beleive Al Gore apparently... he's super serial) But a person, an entity with distinct personality, something that exists beyond the shallow world of simple genetics, now that *is* something to be favoured. And when referring to 'a person' I make no distinction between humans and other animals, or even possible electronic forms of life, as long as it persists with the constant illusion of self, then it's a person. And since i've never seen a cat or parrot with a nasty case of existential angst I think they qualify slightly higher in 'personhood' than emo's... and some tedious philosophers... ;D

But I digress, severely; to create a being simply for the use of harvesting is a little touchy when considering that in the 15 years it'll have of life, it may develop traits which we ascribe to those entities that we refer to as 'people'. It would be a very cruel, not necessarily an injust thing to do, but very cruel to give this being life only to take it away because you need it. Perhaps if they could eliminate higher brain function of the being (which would be easy) then there'd be less of an issue, 'cause the entity would be more like an organic incubator than a person.

[Hunessai]

You can clone independent organs- you don't need the rest of the human attached to it. Cloning also tends to damage the root cell, decreasing the clone's health and lifespan by prematurely aging it and possible increasing the risk of cancer. Of course, this problem could be overcome if better techniques were used.

I don't care if people clone people. The resulting person won't be the same- the duo of nature and nurture insures that.