What Has Science Done!
Human cloning. Should it be allow or not? If allowed, under which conditions? What rights should any eventual clones be given? All of them, just some or none?
Discuss!
Discuss!
Comments51
Join the community to add your comment. Already a deviant? Log In
It's a complex and would need to be perfected before implemented
We don't need some mutated abominations to run around society
We don't need some mutated abominations to run around society
I don't see the point in cloning, per-se. Growing replacement organs from cloned cells is not something I would find objectionable. Not sure why anyone would object. Fully cloned humans, if they look and think like regular humans, would presumably be entitled to the same rights as everyone else, to the extent that rights exist. But I don't see the point in creating such clones. Creating clones to be slaves or unthinking soldiers (like in Star Wars) would seem immoral.
I wouldn't have a problem with genetic engineering to eradicate negative or undesirable traits. We all want to improve our genes, that's why we seek out the fittest and most attractive partner possible. So why not use artificial means to bring about the desired improvement? I'm open to that within reason. I'm sure no-one is desperate to pass on gappy teeth or susceptibility to certain medical problems, and if cloning can help eradicate such things then why not?
I wouldn't take it to transhumanist excesses, though. It might also be a problem if the elite has all the access to the genetic engineering technology that would give them all the advantages, and even potentially a greatly extended life. This would create much resentment among the people who were left behind.
I wouldn't have a problem with genetic engineering to eradicate negative or undesirable traits. We all want to improve our genes, that's why we seek out the fittest and most attractive partner possible. So why not use artificial means to bring about the desired improvement? I'm open to that within reason. I'm sure no-one is desperate to pass on gappy teeth or susceptibility to certain medical problems, and if cloning can help eradicate such things then why not?
I wouldn't take it to transhumanist excesses, though. It might also be a problem if the elite has all the access to the genetic engineering technology that would give them all the advantages, and even potentially a greatly extended life. This would create much resentment among the people who were left behind.
Hell yes. Bring 'em on.
It takes many tries to get a living clone, even more for a undeformed one.
But then they're humans after all. If you deny them rights you're just like the nazis and jews, israel and plaestinians, black enslavement, arabs and none arabs (persians, and turks) in the middle ages, and more recently the lgbt.
Science was meant to be a craft to help making human life better, not a God that accepts human sacrifice.
Humanity doesn't have the wisdom, nor decency to accept one another. We're still throw away our own "illegitimate" babies, and discriminate on racial, and gender bases. It's too much of a responsibility that none can bear.
We have to leave it, and focus on something useful. Like a cure for cancer, and aids.
But then they're humans after all. If you deny them rights you're just like the nazis and jews, israel and plaestinians, black enslavement, arabs and none arabs (persians, and turks) in the middle ages, and more recently the lgbt.
Science was meant to be a craft to help making human life better, not a God that accepts human sacrifice.
Humanity doesn't have the wisdom, nor decency to accept one another. We're still throw away our own "illegitimate" babies, and discriminate on racial, and gender bases. It's too much of a responsibility that none can bear.
We have to leave it, and focus on something useful. Like a cure for cancer, and aids.
Fear is your enemy. Fear stops progress. We have to be brave and get things done. After that, we have to be brave and face the consequences of our acts 
I see your point but these clones are people too. We can't enslave people to be harvested as spare parts, we can't turn them to merchandise, or abuse them as lab rats. That's a step backward for everything we fought for, the American independence, French revolution, the declaration of human rights, even what Jesus stood for.
This is why we need a new morality, a transvaluation of all values. We need to stop being human, we need to transcend into a superior form 
This clones would not be slaves, we could design brainless clones for spare parts
This clones would not be slaves, we could design brainless clones for spare parts
It's a great sentiment, but unfortunately all attempts failed to do so failed (unless someone you know about successfully reached nirvana) 
that's part of why I believe we need grace.
Plus, it would more viable to focus on stem cell therapy then. We can use it to restore people. We don't have to clone a whole person. Let's make some stem cells, put them back, and grow a whole arm.
We don't need women to get pregnant all the way through for spare parts. Just some versatile stem cells in a sciency plate thingie (because I can't spell the actual name xD)
that's part of why I believe we need grace.Plus, it would more viable to focus on stem cell therapy then. We can use it to restore people. We don't have to clone a whole person. Let's make some stem cells, put them back, and grow a whole arm.
We don't need women to get pregnant all the way through for spare parts. Just some versatile stem cells in a sciency plate thingie (because I can't spell the actual name xD)
There is a direct quote from Jesus in the bible where he told slaves to be obedient to their masters so he was actually against all the things you said.
It's Paul, and just before that he commands the masters not to be cruel. It was a response to the immediate situation at hand in tge first century. Nothing in the bible endorse enslaving people. And the west been abusing words out of context since forever.
The scripture you're talking about is in ephesians 6. Please read the chapter and try to understand before you bash in. I don't ridicule you for not sharing my beliefs, it's the least decency I ask for.
The scripture you're talking about is in ephesians 6. Please read the chapter and try to understand before you bash in. I don't ridicule you for not sharing my beliefs, it's the least decency I ask for.
Certainly it should be allowed, for scientific research if nothing else. If the difficulties associated with genetic aberrations in clones are mitigated by some other advances, I suppose it could be allowed for people to commission a clone to raise as a child, such as in the case of a young child dying in an accident and the parents desiring a replacement. That seems grossly wasteful to me, but hey, market forces. I don't think they'd be useful as organ donors, however. I think artificial organs, though still a nascent technology, will be a more viable option before economical human cloning becomes feasible.
With the exception of clones commissioned to be raised as children, I think clones should be denied all rights. Giving them rights would only make them less useful as objects of scientific research.
With the exception of clones commissioned to be raised as children, I think clones should be denied all rights. Giving them rights would only make them less useful as objects of scientific research.
So you're saying you're happy to enslave people and harvest them, just because of how they came to be?
It's like people dehumanising black people, muslims,jews, lgbt, and every other infringed group.
Is science a God now that needs human sacrifice? Wasn't ot supposed to be there to help us.
Or is it there only for the fortunate ones with money?
It's like people dehumanising black people, muslims,jews, lgbt, and every other infringed group.
Is science a God now that needs human sacrifice? Wasn't ot supposed to be there to help us.
Or is it there only for the fortunate ones with money?
So you're saying you're happy to enslave people and harvest them, just because of how they came to be?
In a word, yes. It's peoples' idea of morality that's holding this technology back. I for one am more than willing to look at this from a purely economic perspective.
It's like people dehumanising black people, muslims,jews, lgbt, and every other infringed group.
It's not, actually. Believe it or not, I have thought about this. A useful caste system is one with very clear, unambiguous and immutable boundaries. Racial discrimination is particularly bad at this, for during the Jim Crow times white people were occasionally unfortunate to discover they had a black ancestor, making them count as black by the very silly rules of the time. Furthermore, the demographics you described are numerous and pre-existing. As John F. Kennedy found out, a million angry oppressed minorities can make quite a nuisance of themselves when they show up on your doorstep to demand equal treatment. Clones specifically bred for research would not have this problem, because their upbringing could be tightly controlled to prevent them from rebelling or wanting to rebel, and we wouldn't make any more of them than necessary for research.
Is science a God now that needs human sacrifice? Wasn't ot supposed to be there to help us.
Or is it there only for the fortunate ones with money?
I don't know how to answer the first question, on account of it being completely insane, so moving right along to your second question, yes, science is here to help us, and the system I have outlined would be immensely helpful to all people. Most biomedical research is carried out on rats or other test animals, but the problem is that although rats are a pretty good approximation of humans, they're not humans, and as few as one out of ten pharmaceuticals that work on rats are successful on humans. Testing pharmaceuticals on humans now requires passing a board of ethics and FDA regulations as well as finding and compensating human test subjects. Using cloned human test subjects, rather than finding and compensating members of the general public, could potentially streamline the process, make it more economical, and eliminate random variables. In short, drugs and medical procedures could be produced faster and cheaper than before.
As for your second point, what's wrong with helping rich people? Rich people have problems, too, and they actually have the money to pay for the solutions. When they spend money, it creates jobs for the doctors, nurses, scientists and technicians who would staff this potential cloning lab. Anything that gets rich people to spend their money is better than them just sitting on it forever. This system could be even better if such a cloning lab were a non-profit organization, and funneled all their profits back into more biomedical research.
So you see, this system I have proposed would be highly beneficial, if only we can overcome our naive moral objections. And after all, naive moral objections are what's holding back this technology in the first place.
In a word, yes. It's peoples' idea of morality that's holding this technology back. I for one am more than willing to look at this from a purely economic perspective.
It's like people dehumanising black people, muslims,jews, lgbt, and every other infringed group.
It's not, actually. Believe it or not, I have thought about this. A useful caste system is one with very clear, unambiguous and immutable boundaries. Racial discrimination is particularly bad at this, for during the Jim Crow times white people were occasionally unfortunate to discover they had a black ancestor, making them count as black by the very silly rules of the time. Furthermore, the demographics you described are numerous and pre-existing. As John F. Kennedy found out, a million angry oppressed minorities can make quite a nuisance of themselves when they show up on your doorstep to demand equal treatment. Clones specifically bred for research would not have this problem, because their upbringing could be tightly controlled to prevent them from rebelling or wanting to rebel, and we wouldn't make any more of them than necessary for research.
Is science a God now that needs human sacrifice? Wasn't ot supposed to be there to help us.
Or is it there only for the fortunate ones with money?
I don't know how to answer the first question, on account of it being completely insane, so moving right along to your second question, yes, science is here to help us, and the system I have outlined would be immensely helpful to all people. Most biomedical research is carried out on rats or other test animals, but the problem is that although rats are a pretty good approximation of humans, they're not humans, and as few as one out of ten pharmaceuticals that work on rats are successful on humans. Testing pharmaceuticals on humans now requires passing a board of ethics and FDA regulations as well as finding and compensating human test subjects. Using cloned human test subjects, rather than finding and compensating members of the general public, could potentially streamline the process, make it more economical, and eliminate random variables. In short, drugs and medical procedures could be produced faster and cheaper than before.
As for your second point, what's wrong with helping rich people? Rich people have problems, too, and they actually have the money to pay for the solutions. When they spend money, it creates jobs for the doctors, nurses, scientists and technicians who would staff this potential cloning lab. Anything that gets rich people to spend their money is better than them just sitting on it forever. This system could be even better if such a cloning lab were a non-profit organization, and funneled all their profits back into more biomedical research.
So you see, this system I have proposed would be highly beneficial, if only we can overcome our naive moral objections. And after all, naive moral objections are what's holding back this technology in the first place.
Cloning someone is merely replicating cells to be the same, not having a person live forever or an individual's consciousness or personality to be the same. They'd also wouldn't be the same age or have the same experiences. It's a lot like an artificial identical twin born at a different time. I'd say sure- but I don't really understand why you'd want to.
What the difference between an ordinary child and a cloned one?
A cloned on is a genetic duplicate of another person.
Thing is, we already have genetic duplicates -- twins. If test tube babies are acceptable, so should cloning.
A cloned on is a genetic duplicate of another person.
Thing is, we already have genetic duplicates -- twins. If test tube babies are acceptable, so should cloning.
Seeing as naturally-occuring human clones are not particularly rare, and we already treat them as separate individuals with individual rights, there's no reason at all to expect that artificial clones can or should be treated any differently.
We need cloning to preserve our best looking women and race, otherwise with racial mixing they will go extinct 
The human race will go from the picture at the bottom to the picture at the top
The human race will go from the picture at the bottom to the picture at the top
In all honesty not all white people are cute, some are gross 
Also some ethnic girls are cute
Also some ethnic girls are cute
As in all things, there are overlapping bell curves.
People against cloning and genetic engineering on humans are some of the reasons why democracy must be banned.The average person with no understanding of science just fears new technology due to their god delusion and religion based culture.
Human cloning is just the same as a line assembly, making more of the same shit, now genetic engineering that's where the future is
what our current capability and method of cloning is basically using other sources to instil pregnancy. To replace a spermcell with a bloodcell so to speak.
the biggest problem with this is the actual womb, which still has to be au naturel.
the biggest problem with this is the actual womb, which still has to be au naturel.
As long as people are consenting to whatever it is they have to do and it isn't going
to really "hurt" anyone then I couldn't care less what scientists wish to do.
to really "hurt" anyone then I couldn't care less what scientists wish to do.