Global Ban on Human Cloning

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by lord_darkside_x
Conf1rmed_K1ll.... i ahve to disagree with you on that on the fact we should use such technology. first, the said technology is not tried and true. we have no idea what the outcome will be if we use this technology. second, abuse of this will definitely occur, just as abuse of all other technology occurs. third, religiously this practice would be wrong. no matter what god you believe in, no one has the right to create life. finally though, i believe that no one has the right to decide how a life should be. i believe no human being has the right to decide how a life to be. i believe that everything happens for a reason... call it destiny, call it fate, call it god, call it whatever. we can not limit this force. by doing it we are breaking a law on a level most of us will probably never understand.

---

what an idiot. No one has the right to create life? So every woman that has sex and concieves, she doesn't have the right to create life, is that what you're saying? And if what you MEANT was that no one has the right to create life through artificial means, then what about IVF treatment, or artificial insemination? Is that okay? Are you going to make distinctions, now?

Are any of you people as smart as you'd like to THINK you are? Do any of you know what's going on in the real world? So far, the only living things to have been successfully cloned are fruits, vegetables and a few animals. But there have been problems there, too. Only one out of many embryos survive, and so far, the life span of cloned animals is very short.

Forget that. Forget religious bullshit, and morals and ethics. Think of all the problems that would arise if cloning was allowed. Two clones could breed. That would make mutation a very likely probability, and with it will come an avalanche of new disorders, disabilities and diseases that we know nothing about.

Technology is great! Genetic manipulation and modification has meant bigger potatoes, juicier tomatoes, fatter strawberries, nashi pears, etc, and so on and so forth. But there's a ****ing limit.

This **** pisses me off.

The biggest destruction to man is man himself.

Hehe,
Lost the bet, okay I did not know about it that much and was not sure about you.

But before this gets into a really long droned out thread between the two of us, which it already is becoming, I think I may have the "final agreement" So what all the debate is about, when is a life a life, is it really murder, who is "god", do we have the "rite" to "play" "god", and is it "ethical"

>>> "" <<< quotes would be how would you define ______ aswell

Quote:

---

what an idiot. No one has the right to create life? So every woman that has sex and concieves, she doesn't have the right to create life, is that what you're saying? And if what you MEANT was that no one has the right to create life through artificial means, then what about IVF treatment, or artificial insemination? Is that okay? Are you going to make distinctions, now?

---

maybe you should read the other posts... because as i said....

Quote:

---

trying to alter the way life is created. the creation of life is a natural instinct. if genetic engineering through cloning is used, we take nature out of it. we alter systems.

---

i don't know if i agree with invetro and all that. it too is an ethical question. but that was not the topic. besides there is a difference between "creating life" the way you are taking and "playing god" as i meant it. sorry you misunderstood

3ntropy - i agree... but do you see my point that this is more ethical then forks or computers? this is a stage beyond technology. real:Zero articulated my point as well. this is definitely something living, not a machine or a tool. so that is why i say it is an ethical issue

Ya,
I see your point clearly.
You are judging the topic on your ethics, and I am doing it on my principles.
I agree, it was a bad analogy with forks & computers, to humans. But I was trying to describe my point.

I guess it is just interpretation of the facts, never a right answer. :)

exactly... but that makes the case maybe too controversial to allow. if there is no right answer, it is better to take the lesser of two evils

First off, what makes you think that the government would actually tell you that they had the capability to successfuly clone a human? There's no doubt in my mind that they have the ability to.. if they didn't why are they trying to put a ban on it all over the world? Clones are not real humans and don't deserve the same rights as an actual human. Lord_darkside_x hit the nail right on the head:

Quote:

---

by doing it we are breaking a law on a level most of us will probably never understand.

---

Immagine the consequences of breaking this law. I'm sure it's already been broken and the price for it is more than what I want to pay for technology. It's not worth it.

Quote:

---

Quite true, but does that mean we should ban all of this marvellous technology?

---

I for one fail to see the magnificence of scientist playing God. To me it's more like a horror show that's came to life. There's nothing marvellous about it other than the intelligence it took to come up with the technology.

Quote:

---

SCARY THOUGHT: what if someone has already made a human clone thta no one is aware of?

---

What makes you think that they haven't? If they did, do you honestly think that the public would be allowed to know about it? No.

Quote:

---

nuclear weapons are not for sale to the general public for fear of abuse

---

That dosen't stop terrorist from buying nuclear weaponds. How many 3rd world countries do you think have nuclear capabilities? Where do you think they got the technology? This one's off the subject but ah well.. :D

Quote:

---

No matter what the consequences...

---

That's insanity. I don't know about you but I don't want to pay the price for these government *******s breaking a law on a level most of us will probably never understand. think about what the consequenses for this will be..

Quote:

---

when is technology EVER bad?

---

Weaponds of mass destruction. Fully automatic weaponds. Intercontinental missiles.
Dose that answer your question?

Quote:

---

Human life is something sacred.

---

Indeed it is. What gives scientists and government officials the right to play God.
That's crossing the line between technology and moral ethics and the consequences will be severe.. not something that they should be messing with.

Quote:

---

No one has the right to create life?

---

I think you missed conf1rm3d_k1ll's point. I believe he was refering to scientist creating a life in a lab.. correct me if I'm wrong.

Quote:

---

Are any of you people as smart as you'd like to THINK you are?

---

No, but I still like to think so. :D

Remote_Access_

Quote:

---

That dosen't stop terrorist from buying nuclear weaponds. How many 3rd world countries do you think have nuclear capabilities? Where do you think they got the technology? This one's off the subject but ah well..

---

i think you miss the point in that. i know 3rd world countries and stuff buy them, but... you can't buy them, that was my point. limitations on them.

Quote:

---

No one has the right to create life?

---

i made this point as well ;)

Eating_Scarlett wtf? I'm going to clone myself and then attempt to breed with it?
Listen to yourself, those aren't the major problems to consider.

The frightening thing would be what will come of cloning humans. Will a clone have equal rights as a seperate individual or will it have to take a license out on it's genes? Could corporations farm clones and use them for whatever purpose?

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
when is technology EVER bad?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Weaponds of mass destruction. Fully automatic weaponds. Intercontinental missiles.
Dose that answer your question?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

No it does not. Those weapons of mass destruction have been a safe gaurd to the us for years. Imagine, if we had not had nuclear missles during the cold war, Russia would had fired their nukes upon us, knowing that we did not have any offensive large enough to strike back. Fully automatic weapons have helped us keep peace in 3rd world nations. "Let's go TALK to osama and see if he was sorry, we don't need "bad" guns. I bet he is sorry for what he did." And even back into WWII we STOPPED it with two atomic bombs dropping on Japan. Now how else could he have stopped the war in a matter of days? So, techonology is NEVER bad.