Humans deserve protection and no innocent human should be deliberately harmed.
Did that answer your question?
You ask me to define human, but ignore the fact that I question if "human" in the sense of possessing homo sapiens genetic material is the basis of the belief in the sanctity of "human" life. That's why I asked all those questions in that post.
That is why I asked you, “What is human?” If that is not it then what is it?
An individual lifeform possessing homo sapiens genetic material and capable of self-awareness. I suppose that is a good start.
Then Siamese twins are not human?
Once you move beyond the “homo sapiens genetic material” things get very murky. Which is why I draw the line there. I would rather error on the side of extending the protection rather then cause suffering to a fellow human.
My objection to cloning is simple, every time it is brought up it is always in the context of what "use" cloned humans will be to the rest of us.
There are two things in the universe. Humans and tradable commodities. Which is a human clone to you? You and every other advocate of cloning have expressed a desire to treat them as commodities.
I reject that a human can be a commodity. Human clones are human. Therefore I will do everything in my power to prevent them from being labeled commodity. I would rather not see the civilized world go down that path again.
No, you may not experiment on them. No, you may not tinker with their genes. No, you may not enslave them. No, you may not use them as living organ banks. No, you may not make use of them period.
Once it is accepted that you may not make use of a Human clone then the question becomes, Why would you clone?
Granted that there are a few vain people in the world who are sure that their genes are special and that they should continue on throughout eternity. But aside from them who would want to clone?