Posted on 01/30/2003 10:24:04 PM PST by MHGinTN
The President called for a ban on cloning in his State of the Union Address. So, what's wrong with cloning?
Every individual life is a continuum hallmarked by growth and development. We are invited, through the media, to differentiate reproductive cloning from therapeutic cloning, but both conceive a cloned individual human being, in vitro. Scientists seeking to exploit therapeutic cloning would have us believe that, because their goal doesn't include life support to the birth stage, their 'form' of cloning is okay. Far from it; it's a worse application of the technology. Therapeutic cloning seeks to conceive 'designer' individual human beings, give them life support either in a growth medium or a woman's body, then kill and harvest from these individuals the target tissues for which the cloned being was conceived.
It is important to realize that an embryo IS an individual human being: goals of cloning scientists bear witness to the hidden truth that they are conceiving a unique human being, whether for reproductive or therapeutic aims. Giving tacit acceptance to a proven lie --that the embryo is not an individual human life-- is bad enough, we’ve done this for more than thirty years, but to embrace cannibalism founded on such a lie is far more degenerate.
Tacit acceptance for manipulating individual human life has lead from in vitro fertilization to partial birth infanticide, proving the bankruptcy of continuing moderate acceptance. We are now staring at cannibalism in the name of whatever you care to call it. Even an embryo no bigger than a grain of sugar is an individual human life. Is it acceptable to kill that individual for their body parts? If you think that it is, at least know that it is cannibalism.
A clone of Elvira,the Mistress of the Dark,or Jaime Presley could grab me anywhere they want,anytime they want.
Don't confuse religious superstition with science.
I guess what I'm saying is, spiritual/religious issues aside, is that we don't know what the consequences are for the clone or the rest of humanity on a purely medical level, and I would hate to see some hapless people suffer because of some scientists'(like Clonaid scientists) zeal.
Plus, the courts have not ruled conclusively on things like frozen fertilized embryos following a divorce. What happens if someone can eventually clone you with a DNA sample such as a strand of hair? What rights would you have as the "original?" What if someone decides it would be sort of cool to clone great leaders... or great tyrants? Or even a celebrity? What makes you special as Cindy Crawford if there are ten Cindy Crawford lookalikes?
If someone clones you without your consent, who are the clone's parents? Your parents?
Too many medical and legal issues have not been clarified.
One good reason not to clone.
When there is a heartbeat and brain activity.
HorseHillary! The whole concept of "life begings at erection" is based on religious beliefs. Primarily Catholic Christian religious beliefs. Your bizarre claim that it is based on scientific fact is pure HorseHillary.
Since it is a fact that an individual lifetime is a continuum that begins at fecundation, at conception, it is glaringly paradoxical to arbitrarily remove any age along that continuum in an effort to prove a later start to the continuum ... If a person tells you that he or she originated at 18 weeks from conception, or originated when she or he took their first breath, or originated when his or her brain first had a thought, or originated when his or her heart muscle first contracted, or originated when her or his gonads first functioned, just remember, the lifetime of every individual human BEING begins at their unique conception/fecundation and to choose some other point to believe the continuum begins is absolutely arbitrarily illogical, not based in science or truth.OK, but now continue the continuum... When does this person's life end?
Should we say it doesn't end until every cell in their body has died? If your concept of a person's life is internally consistent, you have no other choice. Think about the absurdities that would imply. Are you comfortable with that?
Pete stated, superstitiously, "When there is a heartbeat and brain activity."
Your sad lack of scientific understanding makes it difficult if not futile to discuss cloning with you. But here's a simple non-scientific but logical question for those reading your assertion (can you recognize the superstitious paradox in pete's assertion, arbitrarily conveying 'human' on that which cannot be anything but human life from the beginning of its existence?): Has anything other than a human popped from a human womb nine months after the start of its life, during the course of recorded history?
More formidible minds than mine ought to address this and expound on your thoughful notion, but here's my 'first thought'.
The adult human is well adapted to living in the environment around us (outside the womb). The form and function of the complexity that is an individual human being in the adult stage are thus the defining characteristics for that age. To ask 'when do these form and function characteristics cease to define the being' has been addressed by societies, and now medical science, ever since, I suppose, we began dealing with our dead. At present, medical science uses a 'death protocol' when contemplating organ harvesting from an individual body. But it would be useful to note that the definition for 'dead' is also based on the form and function that previously defined 'alive'. That form and function notion, if applied logically to the emryo, would argue for a being present in utero because the embryo is well adapted in form and function for life at that age in the continuum. There isn't really any absurdity in such an apprroach and it would argue for protecting the individual human life present in embryonic age/stage.
What do we call a child born out of wedlock?
If you've ever known any identical twins well, you know that they are not really "identical," despite their common beginnings.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.