And if the practice of destroying embryos were ended, the same could be said about IVF.
Some people are infertile and always will be. You can't always get what you want.
The problem is when you can get what you want, but busybodies step in to prevent you from getting it.
It is not an end run around the natural functioning of the body. IVF is.
No, IVF is an end run around the disfunctioning of the body.
Are you denying that cloning technology is sitting on top of the shoulders of the entire IVF, articifical reproductive technology industry?
Of course not. It's just that I don't start from the premise that that industry is inherently evil.
Folks will lose a child in an accident and then "clone" him to try to make a new "Timmy."
That's their prerogative. People often have children to "replace" lost siblings even today. It's pathetic, but hardly a disaster.
A Woody Allen type will clone his wife and then dump her when his daughter/wife starts to remind him more of the girl he fell in love with.
Under any scenario, cloned humans would have the same legal status as any other human being. It's up to the clone whether she wants to date the old fart when she's of age. If for some reason cloned humans do end up being chattel slaves, that's a political problem with a political solution, and in no way a technological problem.
People will abort their accidental "natural" babies in order to order the latest genetically pure baby from Sears.
Like Gattica, "naturally" conceived people will be relegated to second class status, as they will be deemed too short lived to be worth the bother of educating.
These last two suggest to me that you aren't really sure of what clones are.
And if the practice of destroying embryos were ended, the same could be said about IVF.
You have a point. Unfortunately, as it is practiced today the two are intertwined. I am much less inclined to rally against such things if I don't believe that innocent life is being wasted.
If a pure IVF could be done withouth surplus embryos or abortion then I would consider it more like adultery than murder. And we all know it is futile to try to imprison adulterers.
Some people are infertile and always will be. You can't always get what you want.
The problem is when you can get what you want, but busybodies step in to prevent you from getting it.
As I stated just above, if the destruction of embryos were not involved I would be more open to the idea. As it is I am not calling for a ban on IVF. Cloning may require some more study before we sanction or not it.
People will abort their accidental "natural" babies in order to order the latest genetically pure baby from Sears.
Like Gattica, "naturally" conceived people will be relegated to second class status, as they will be deemed too short lived to be worth the bother of educating.
These last two suggest to me that you aren't really sure of what clones are.
You are correct that these two are not representative of "cloning," per se. They are however nightmare scenarios of the future of genetic engineering. Once we know how to artificially create embryos, we have the opportunity to replace the genetic material with that of another. This si cloning. Once we have this skill done pat, you can be assured that tampering with the genetic code to get the desired results will follow.
First it will be to get rid of birth defects, or future heart trouble, or something like that. Then alcoholism and obesity and such. Then for the right eyes, hair color, chin, or IQ.
SD
The 'disfunctioning' of the body? How is infertility dysfunctional?
Bodies function as bodies function. To speak (meaningfully) of the dysfunctioning of the body requires the speaker to assume that bodies ought properly to function a certain way, as if they were designed to work in a manner the speaker can identify if not indeed define.