Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 1/18/2002 10:05:12 PM EDT
[b]Academy of Sciences urges ban on human cloning[/b] [url]http://www.cnn.com/2002/HEALTH/01/18/academies.cloning/index.html[/url] "The National Academy of Sciences recommended Friday that human reproductive cloning -- cloning to create a baby -- be legally banned. "Human reproductive cloning should not now be practiced. It is dangerous and likely to fail," Dr. Irving Weissman, the chairman of the panel that made the recommendation, said while presenting the findings at a news conference." Ban is good move? Ban goes too far? Ban goes not far enough?
Link Posted: 1/18/2002 10:14:12 PM EDT
Link Posted: 1/18/2002 10:54:00 PM EDT
Originally Posted By The_Macallan: [b]Academy of Sciences urges ban on human cloning[/b] [url]http://www.cnn.com/2002/HEALTH/01/18/academies.cloning/index.html[/url] "The National Academy of Sciences recommended Friday that human reproductive cloning -- cloning to create a baby -- be legally banned. "Human reproductive cloning should not now be practiced. It is dangerous and likely to fail," Dr. Irving Weissman, the chairman of the panel that made the recommendation, said while presenting the findings at a news conference." Ban is good move? Ban goes too far? Ban goes not far enough?
View Quote
I can't wait to hear what you think!
Link Posted: 1/19/2002 5:02:36 AM EDT
Originally Posted By punkatomic:
Originally Posted By The_Macallan: [b]Academy of Sciences urges ban on human cloning[/b] [url]http://www.cnn.com/2002/HEALTH/01/18/academies.cloning/index.html[/url] "The National Academy of Sciences recommended Friday that human reproductive cloning -- cloning to create a baby -- be legally banned. "Human reproductive cloning should not now be practiced. It is dangerous and likely to fail," Dr. Irving Weissman, the chairman of the panel that made the recommendation, said while presenting the findings at a news conference." Ban is good move? Ban goes too far? Ban goes not far enough?
View Quote
I can't wait to hear what you think!
View Quote
[b]"Human reproductive cloning should not now be practiced. It is dangerous and likely to fail"[/b] Yep, pretty much sums it up right there.
Link Posted: 1/19/2002 5:19:07 AM EDT
Human reproduction cloning happens every time an egg is fertilized, under lab conditions it is another thing. But hey, seeing the dregs of humanity that are rpoduced the antural way, I am all for giving science a shot at it. Clone away!
Link Posted: 1/19/2002 5:28:14 AM EDT
This movement will move to other shores if "WE" ban it.What did heilo say? .....CLONE AWAY!
Link Posted: 1/19/2002 5:29:09 AM EDT
Originally Posted By raf: The ban on drugs/guns/porno/alcohol wasn't a success.
View Quote
Apparently the bans on murder, rape, robbery, child abuse, drunk driving and crashing jetliners into skyscrapers are not working either. So let's do away all those bans too, right raf? [whacko]
Link Posted: 1/19/2002 5:32:04 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/19/2002 5:32:25 AM EDT by The_Macallan]
Originally Posted By bolt: This movement will move to other shores if "WE" ban it.What did heilo say? .....CLONE AWAY!
View Quote
Using your "logic", psychotic sociopaths will still get guns regardless of any gun laws, so let's just make it easier for them and hand them an uzi as they leave the psycho ward!
Link Posted: 1/19/2002 5:34:45 AM EDT
They should only be allowed to clone Hot Chicks with Politicaly Conserviative and sexualy liberal views. These are amoung the rarest and most highly sought after traits I can think of that would actually justify human cloneing.
Link Posted: 1/19/2002 5:49:47 AM EDT
Link Posted: 1/19/2002 6:02:05 AM EDT
I think that human cloning can be a good thing if used to regenerate cells/organs. This way it's an exact biological match of the person it's going to. Also, this prevents/helps the problem of not enough organ donors. With that said, I don't believe we should clone full humans. I believe that to be immoral because it's unnatural. So are cloned organs, but I can live with a cloned organ in a natural born person vice a completely cloned person. If we cloned whole people, who knows where it may go. But if we keep it to cells/organs; we may actually help humanity. [^]
Link Posted: 1/19/2002 6:04:43 AM EDT
ET#, human reproduction is cloning...natures own. Let the scientists in there and get that little kid with the 300+ IQ you always wanted. I am all for it. (As an aside, why would you want to clone an unhealthy organ? Sort of defeats teh purpose, doesn't it? Or are you *also* talking genetic manipulation?)
Link Posted: 1/19/2002 6:08:07 AM EDT
W/Hielo and raf on this. Anytime this comes up my reply will be the same. I want 3 Jennifer Aniston clones. 2 to play with and a third in case I "wear out" one of the others. [sex][:D]
Link Posted: 1/19/2002 6:11:33 AM EDT
Link Posted: 1/19/2002 6:14:57 AM EDT
Originally Posted By hielo: ET#, human reproduction is cloning...natures own. Let the scientists in there and get that little kid with the 300+ IQ you always wanted. I am all for it. (As an aside, why would you want to clone an unhealthy organ? Sort of defeats teh purpose, doesn't it? Or are you *also* talking genetic manipulation?)
View Quote
If my child has a 300+ IQ with no intervention from man, I'm happier than not knowing how smart he/she would have been if not for the manipulation. Yes, I am talking about genetic manipulation also. It kinda ties in with the cloning; not totaly, but partialy.
Link Posted: 1/19/2002 6:27:49 AM EDT
In an interesting twist, a research paper of the National Academy of Sciences was discovered from 1902 urging against the experimentation of flight. The paper includes the quote "Flight should not now be practiced. It is dangerous and likely to fail." -CK
Link Posted: 1/19/2002 6:44:19 AM EDT
From the article- "Groups that say they are working to clone a human now lack the fundamental biological knowledge to do so, the panel said. They also have not demonstrated the safety of animal cloning nor developed appropriate testing methods to assure safety." If they ban it, how are they going to perfect it and make it safe? I don't get it. If you wanna make an omelet, you have to break a few eggs (heh heh). Clone away. Clone away. Clone away. Clone away. Clone away. Clone away. Clone away.
Link Posted: 1/19/2002 6:48:34 AM EDT
Oh, and for those against any form of cloning, that would include stem cell research and treatments. You should know that one of our very own here recently received great benefit from stem cells in his fight against cancer. Wouldn't have been possible with cloning research and technology.
Link Posted: 1/19/2002 6:50:22 AM EDT
Heard a caller ask Art Bell on his show one night, "since a clone is man-made would it have a soul?"
Link Posted: 1/19/2002 6:54:44 AM EDT
"Human reproductive cloning should not now be practiced. It is dangerous and likely to fail,"
View Quote
In what sense is it dangerous and in what sense is it likely to fail? The statement almost seems contradictory, like a statement from the anti-gunners that we need to worry about criminals having unreliable firearms. Cloning is the artificial creation of a genetic duplicate of a cell or a set of cells, such as an organ or an organsim. Since human reproduction involves a process called "sex" (ever heard of that, Heilo? [;)] ) that results in the offspring having a blend of the parents' genes, it's inaccurate to say it's the same thing as cloning.
Link Posted: 1/19/2002 6:54:50 AM EDT
Link Posted: 1/19/2002 6:59:26 AM EDT
Originally Posted By raf: The Items listed by me are described by the term "malem prohibitas" meaning that the items are evil only because they have beem outlawed, as opposed to the items listed by you, "malem in se", which are evil in and of themselves. That's why there is a differential in the success rate in the banning of "my" items and "yours"...
View Quote
I see your point. However, why is "drunk driving" malem in se? If the near certainty of disasterous consequences of an act (such as shooting guns straight into the air above a large crowd or driving drunk through a school zone) is worthy of banning that action, couldn't the same apply to human reproductive cloning? Personally, I don't see cloning for stem cell research in the same category as reproductive cloning so I went for the middle road on this one.
Link Posted: 1/19/2002 7:03:58 AM EDT
I say we make clones for the army. Genetically engineer them for speed and strength. Train them from birth to be soldiers. Then, we could take over the galaxy.
Link Posted: 1/19/2002 7:08:50 AM EDT
I don't think we should ban cloning humans, just humans with brains, or fully developed brains. I would want a clone of myself made that's 20 years younger then me so that I could part it out when things on me start to break.
Link Posted: 1/19/2002 7:11:13 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Renamed:
"Human reproductive cloning should not now be practiced. It is dangerous and likely to fail,"
View Quote
In what sense is it dangerous and in what sense is it likely to fail? The statement almost seems contradictory, like a statement from the anti-gunners that we need to worry about criminals having unreliable firearms.
View Quote
Presently, all animal cloning attempts have produced very high rate of "disasterous" malformations many of which survive birth for at least some periods of time. Other outcomes have been less monsterous, yet still have severe metabolic and other disorders that render the surviving offspring very unhealthy. I would not want to engage in an activity that has a VERY HIGH CHANCE of producing many developmentally disasterous human offspring who would lead short yet (hopefully not) suffering-filled lives and many more doomed to severe metabolic disorders for the rest of their life. We already have plenty of babies naturally concieved and born with crippling congenital disorders - I would not want create who-knows-how-many-more of them just for the hope that we might learn from our mistakes. Limiting cloning for stem cell research seems a good balance between our research needs and the reducing risk of "experimental survivors"
Link Posted: 1/19/2002 7:11:18 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/19/2002 7:36:45 AM EDT by Renamed]
I say we wait until "Star Wars: Episode II" is released so we can see how well cloning worked for Senator Lieberman -- er, Palpatine. [:E] [img]http://fyi.cnn.com/2001/ALLPOLITICS/stories/01/23/bush.wrap/lieberman.jpg[/img] [img]http://les1.man.ac.uk/government/postgrad/slavery/images/palpatine.JPG[/img]
Link Posted: 1/19/2002 7:14:56 AM EDT
Originally Posted By raf: ALL humans are man- (and woman-) made. Regardless if a clone or not. Nobody has a gripe with twins, so why clones? Do the details really matter that much in the big picture?
View Quote
They are not gentically manipulated, makes a big difference.
Link Posted: 1/19/2002 7:23:30 AM EDT
Link Posted: 1/19/2002 7:30:51 AM EDT
Originally Posted By raf: Our choice of mates is perhaps the ultimate in genetic manipulation. Not to say that abortion isn't another form of manipulation, as well. Having said that, I understand the thrust of your statement. I simply beilive that cloning/manipulation will occur whether we, in this country, approve or not.
View Quote
yeah it will occur somewhere. Not in California though, it was banned. Cant have no lethal clones you know.
Link Posted: 1/19/2002 8:11:02 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Renamed: I say we wait until "Star Wars: Episode II" is released so we can see how well cloning worked for Senator Lieberman -- er, Palpatine. [:E] [img]http://fyi.cnn.com/2001/ALLPOLITICS/stories/01/23/bush.wrap/lieberman.jpg[/img] [img]http://les1.man.ac.uk/government/postgrad/slavery/images/palpatine.JPG[/img]
View Quote
Grin - [:D]
Link Posted: 1/19/2002 8:16:35 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/19/2002 12:19:51 PM EDT by 5subslr5]
(The_Macallan, although we will be on different sides thanks for a thought provoking topic. ------------------------------------------------- First, just for a moment consider this. Have we already cloned a human ? My pure guess says we probably have. The benefits are too numerous for me to calculate - not only the continuation of life but continuation with 'quality'. Longer term (Hopefully very long term.) cloning will be necessary for continuation of our specie. In this present form we simply do not travel well in space. Our bones and muscles deterioate rapidly and probably far worse our immune system ceases to function. (Many other physiological changes.) If we are forced ( or choose) to travel long distances in space (and within the current restraints of physics) we must travel in a drastically altered form. Cloning could eventually provide a satisfactory form. Of course we may choose to die here on our small planet. [smoke]
Link Posted: 1/19/2002 8:41:36 AM EDT
It ain't my quote Renamed, I am all for clonging, hell, They should sell clonging kits on HSN.
Originally Posted By Renamed:
"Human reproductive cloning should not now be practiced. It is dangerous and likely to fail,"
View Quote
In what sense is it dangerous and in what sense is it likely to fail? The statement almost seems contradictory, like a statement from the anti-gunners that we need to worry about criminals having unreliable firearms. Cloning is the artificial creation of a genetic duplicate of a cell or a set of cells, such as an organ or an organsim. Since human reproduction involves a process called "sex" (ever heard of that, Heilo? [;)] ) that results in the offspring having a blend of the parents' genes, it's inaccurate to say it's the same thing as cloning.
View Quote
Link Posted: 1/19/2002 10:02:02 AM EDT
Originally Posted By hielo: ET#, human reproduction is cloning...natures own. Let the scientists in there and get that little kid with the 300+ IQ you always wanted. I am all for it. (As an aside, why would you want to clone an unhealthy organ? Sort of defeats teh purpose, doesn't it? Or are you *also* talking genetic manipulation?)
View Quote
Just because a person needs an organ, it doesn't mean that the organ is unhealthy. I know that patients with kidney disease, their kidneys are basically healthy, but the disease kills the kidney, but it also kills the donor organ, at least with a cloned organ, they don't have to worry about rejection as much. And speaking from personal experiance, I had a kidney transplant last april, and the doctors have no Idea why my kidneys failed, and as far as anyone knows, a cloned one would be perfectly fine, since the prevailing theory has to do with my stillborn twin brother.
Link Posted: 1/19/2002 5:16:12 PM EDT
No. It should not be banned. Science and technology will continue to march on regardless of what laws are passed. The last thing we need is federal agents busting down doors of cloning labs.
Link Posted: 1/21/2002 10:35:42 AM EDT
It is my opinion that it entirely off base to think that the human genome is some how sacred, or holy. It is simply a chemical process, to be engineered, and exploited like many other technologies we have developed in the past. Yes there are perils and pitfall and morale questions to be adressed like any new technology, but like all technologies, if it is possible it is inevetable, if not here then in some other country. The medical possibilites for coloing alone are gargatuine in proportion! Imagine if at the age of 20 every person had a double cloned that was engineered to develop with a higher brain. These seconds if you will could be kept in storage alive on intervenus fluids ready to be 'parted out' when needed by their owner! It could double or triple the life execptancy of the average person. You could even conceviably 'swap bodies' and suddenly be 20 again!
Link Posted: 1/21/2002 10:50:01 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Armed_Scientist: It is my opinion that it entirely off base to think that the human genome is some how sacred, or holy. It is simply a chemical process, to be engineered, and exploited like many other technologies we have developed in the past. Yes there are perils and pitfall and morale questions to be adressed like any new technology, but like all technologies, if it is possible it is inevetable, if not here then in some other country. The medical possibilites for coloing alone are gargatuine in proportion! Imagine if at the age of 20 every person had a double cloned that was engineered to develop with a higher brain. These seconds if you will could be kept in storage alive on intervenus fluids ready to be 'parted out' when needed by their owner! It could double or triple the life execptancy of the average person. You could even conceviably 'swap bodies' and suddenly be 20 again!
View Quote
"kept in storage?!" "parted out?!" "when needed by [u]their OWNER[/u]?!" This dramatically reveals the true potential horror of cloning!! Not only is your knowledge of human physiology obviously weak, your bizarre attitude towards other humans (those that are clones in your example) is downright frightening. Reason enough to abolish all reproductive cloning. "Be afraid, be very afraid"
Link Posted: 1/21/2002 11:00:11 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Armed_Scientist: It is my opinion that it entirely off base to think that the human genome is some how sacred, or holy. It is simply a chemical process, to be engineered, and exploited like many other technologies we have developed in the past. Yes there are perils and pitfall and morale questions to be adressed like any new technology, but like all technologies, if it is possible it is inevetable, if not here then in some other country. The medical possibilites for coloing alone are gargatuine in proportion! Imagine if at the age of 20 every person had a double cloned that was engineered to develop with a higher brain. These seconds if you will could be kept in storage alive on intervenus fluids ready to be 'parted out' when needed by their owner! It could double or triple the life execptancy of the average person. You could even conceviably 'swap bodies' and suddenly be 20 again!
View Quote
Sorry, this one is SO bizarre it deserves a second reply. Maybe your clone, who is more intelligent than you (engineered for "better brain") can be thawed from storage and YOU can be put into storage and be "parted out" to support HIS lifespan. He would be much more useful for society (due to enhanced IQ, etc.) than YOU so it only seems fair, for the good of society, to replace YOU [:|] (with your feeble intelligence) with a more advanced copy [:D]. Let's put YOU into storage and keep YOU on intravenous feeding to support HIM. [^]
Link Posted: 1/21/2002 11:11:32 AM EDT
Cloning should not be banned. The government can't stop it, all they can do is push the technology and scientists persuing this project into other countries. I agree reproductive cloning is sketchy, but growing organs would be great. Imagine being able to help those with failed organs and damaged joints. In addition, perhaps the technology could be adapted to work inside the body. Perhaps knowledge gained from cloning experiments could lead to injections that could heal a blown out knee or severed spinal cord. Ethics should be established, but research should continue.
Link Posted: 1/21/2002 11:37:48 AM EDT
The_Macallan, Notice I said that spare parts clones would engineered without sentience!, just a brain steam. I would considered it murder if the clone was intelegent, sentient! Engineering a person to be more advanced and cloning it for parents or whatever is an entirely different proposition!
Link Posted: 1/21/2002 11:43:33 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/21/2002 11:44:45 AM EDT by The_Macallan]
Originally Posted By Armed_Scientist: The_Macallan, Notice I said that spare parts clones would engineered without sentience!, just a brain steam. I would considered it murder if the clone was intelegent, sentient! Engineering a person to be more advanced and cloning it for parents or whatever is an entirely different proposition!
View Quote
Uh... no I didn't notice that. [b]Because you didn't write that![/b] Try re-reading your post and show me where you mentioned anything about "without sentience" or "brainstem only". Regardless, deliberately creating an anencephalic human for "spare parts" is just as monsterously disgusting and does not make your idea any more "humane". Your ideas are still frighteningly bizarre regardless of whether the "human/creature" has a cerebrum or not. Disgusting. [edited for speling]
Link Posted: 1/21/2002 11:50:21 AM EDT
sorry, I wrote that in my first post, guess my thoughts were going faster then my typing
Link Posted: 1/21/2002 11:55:39 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Renamed: I say we wait until "Star Wars: Episode II" is released so we can see how well cloning worked for Senator Lieberman -- er, Palpatine. [:E] [img]http://fyi.cnn.com/2001/ALLPOLITICS/stories/01/23/bush.wrap/lieberman.jpg[/img] [img]http://les1.man.ac.uk/government/postgrad/slavery/images/palpatine.JPG[/img]
View Quote
[:D][:D][:D]Now [b]THAT[/b] is funny![:D][:D][:D]
Link Posted: 1/21/2002 12:00:36 PM EDT
We must begin cloning immediately. It is a matter of National Security! The United States is in an economic fight for its life. If we are to maintain the status as the leader of the free world, we must begin human cloning research immediately. It would be naive to think that our competitors will not begin human cloning research. Third world nations and other underdeveloped countries could benifit greatly from human cloning. Many of these nations have a significant dearth of scientific and engineering talent. I can imagine such a nation vigorously persuing a human eugenics program. They may start by cloning their existing top scientific minds. It seems likely that they would also attempt to genetically enhance the intelligence of the next generation. In a financially strapped nation, it seems reasonable to expect that they would dedicate their scarce resources to those who could contribute to most to the financial security of their country. Human cloning is inevitable, and the only question is: Shall America be its victim, or its beneficiary? GuptaSoft will make MicroSoft seem like small potatos.
Link Posted: 1/21/2002 12:24:30 PM EDT
Originally Posted By The_Macallan:
Originally Posted By bolt: This movement will move to other shores if "WE" ban it.What did heilo say? .....CLONE AWAY!
View Quote
Using your "logic", psychotic sociopaths will still get guns regardless of any gun laws, so let's just make it easier for them and hand them an uzi as they leave the psycho ward!
View Quote
.....Your parallel here, [b]guns/psycho's,[/b] leads me to think your not of this group's sentiments AT ALL!...man should never try new research[rolleyes]
Link Posted: 1/21/2002 12:43:41 PM EDT
Link Posted: 1/21/2002 1:41:44 PM EDT
I have been waiting for someone, anyone to mention the one thing that does not concern the morality, or the Religious implications of cloning, that will bring great harm to our society. I have not seen this mentioned by anyone in the news media, politician or anyone including the people who post here. Cloning will destroy our legal system, which is not perfect in the first place, but cloning will finish it off. And this is how it will happen. Just think of what a clone is, it is a genetic duplicate of the original and this means that a clone can not be distinguished from the original except that it will be younger. All distinguishing characteristics are the same, the DNA is of course the same and I believe the fingerprints will be the same, plus the voice except for any differences due to age difference. And what happens if there are more then one clone made of the original, like what if George Forman had himself cloned, he has named all his sons George so he might want several copies of himself and lets not forget the movie Boys of Brazil. And since there have been babies switched at birth how about if someone gets some blood of a newborn and has a clone or two made her or himself, the possibilities are frighting. This should be enough to show everyone how Cloning will mess up our legal system, but if you still do not understand I will continue. Lets say a person commits a rape or murder, and this person is very careless and not only is there a witness but this person leaves both fingerprint and DNA evidence. So now this person is arrested and it is a sure thing that this criminal will be convicted, considering all the in refutable evidence against the defendant, an open and shut case as it were. So here we have a court case where the prosecution knows that they really have the right person on trial and they will win the case, when the defense declares that they their client is innocent and it is another man who committed this crime. But how can this be Fingerprints and DNA do not lie, at least they never did before. The defense brings in a couple of men as evidence for the defense and this evidence is two clones of the defendant. So now the eyewitness evidence is of no value, the DNA evidence is also useless, and the fingerprints are also same as the two clones. So how is a jury going to convict the defendant when there are two other persons, the clones, that all the evidence equally points to. The defendant has to be convicted beyond a reasonable doubt, and a general principle of American Law is that it is better for a guilty person to go free then for an innocent person to be convicted. So anyone have any ideas about what the courts can and will do about this problem. Does anyone still think that cloning a complete person is a good idea ?????
Link Posted: 1/21/2002 2:34:43 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/21/2002 2:35:41 PM EDT by Top_Cat]
[B]Just think of what a clone is, it is a genetic duplicate of the original and this means that a clone can not be distinguished from the original except that it will be younger. All distinguishing characteristics are the same, the DNA is of course the same and I believe the fingerprints will be the same, plus the voice except for any differences due to age difference. [/B]
View Quote
Being a genetic copy of someone else doesn't guarantee you will develop in the same way as them. For one, the fingerprints will NOT be the same (http://www.nytimes.com/learning/students/scienceqa/archive/010125.html) and the voice patterns aren't going to be the same either unless the clones actually live with each other and learned to copy each other, as can happen in any family of genetically non-identical people. In short, a genetic clone is just that. Genetic clones are not perfect copies of people. All of the rest of the developing is done in growing up. For example, identical twins rarely take on the same characteristics and is a large proportion of cases, one twin is right handed, and the other left handed. There are other differences too so you can tell the difference between them. Their faces (even with the same genome) develop differently, bodies develop differently etc. And the rest of your post is base on the flawed premise that fingerprint evidence will be enough so is naturally logically invalid. In your court case example, the evidence shown would be that you'd have two different sets of fingerprints but identical genomes, hence the problem would be detected.
Link Posted: 1/21/2002 2:37:20 PM EDT
The only rule is that a ban on cloning Democrats be passed. The last thing the world needs is another 8 years of a Clinton Clone. Now, if they'd clone Teddy Roosevelt we'd have a true pro-gun president for once. Of course Regaen would tell the terrorists who is in charge.
Link Posted: 1/21/2002 2:53:22 PM EDT
Originally Posted By bolt:
Originally Posted By The_Macallan:
Originally Posted By bolt: This movement will move to other shores if "WE" ban it.What did heilo say? .....CLONE AWAY!
View Quote
Using your "logic", psychotic sociopaths will still get guns regardless of any gun laws, so let's just make it easier for them and hand them an uzi as they leave the psycho ward!
View Quote
.....Your parallel here, [b]guns/psycho's,[/b] leads me to think your not of this group's sentiments AT ALL!...man should never try new research[rolleyes]
View Quote
I don't understand your criticism of my reply. Can you clarify your point?
Link Posted: 1/21/2002 3:36:20 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Sniper_762x51: I have been waiting for someone, anyone to mention the one thing that does not concern the morality, or the Religious implications of cloning, that will bring great harm to our society. I have not seen this mentioned by anyone in the news media, politician or anyone including the people who post here. Cloning will destroy our legal system, which is not perfect in the first place, but cloning will finish it off. And this is how it will happen. Just think of what a clone is, it is a genetic duplicate of the original and this means that a clone can not be distinguished from the original except that it will be younger. All distinguishing characteristics are the same, the DNA is of course the same and I believe the fingerprints will be the same, plus the voice except for any differences due to age difference. And what happens if there are more then one clone made of the original, like what if George Forman had himself cloned, he has named all his sons George so he might want several copies of himself and lets not forget the movie Boys of Brazil. And since there have been babies switched at birth how about if someone gets some blood of a newborn and has a clone or two made her or himself, the possibilities are frighting. This should be enough to show everyone how Cloning will mess up our legal system, but if you still do not understand I will continue. Lets say a person commits a rape or murder, and this person is very careless and not only is there a witness but this person leaves both fingerprint and DNA evidence. So now this person is arrested and it is a sure thing that this criminal will be convicted, considering all the in refutable evidence against the defendant, an open and shut case as it were. So here we have a court case where the prosecution knows that they really have the right person on trial and they will win the case, when the defense declares that they their client is innocent and it is another man who committed this crime. But how can this be Fingerprints and DNA do not lie, at least they never did before. The defense brings in a couple of men as evidence for the defense and this evidence is two clones of the defendant. So now the eyewitness evidence is of no value, the DNA evidence is also useless, and the fingerprints are also same as the two clones. So how is a jury going to convict the defendant when there are two other persons, the clones, that all the evidence equally points to. The defendant has to be convicted beyond a reasonable doubt, and a general principle of American Law is that it is better for a guilty person to go free then for an innocent person to be convicted. So anyone have any ideas about what the courts can and will do about this problem. Does anyone still think that cloning a complete person is a good idea ?????
View Quote
Unless yo can have your clon grow REALLY FAST!! you cannot let him/it (whatever) be the fall guy.. "Your honor the blood and DNA evidance is inconclusive because we also have this two year old withthe same DNA. Therefor My client cannot be proven beyond a reason doublt" it is better for a guilty person to go free then for an innocent person to be convicted? That is fast changing my man....
Link Posted: 1/21/2002 4:55:13 PM EDT
Originally Posted By The_Macallan:
Originally Posted By bolt:
Originally Posted By The_Macallan:
Originally Posted By bolt: This movement will move to other shores if "WE" ban it.What did heilo say? .....CLONE AWAY!
View Quote
Using your "logic", psychotic sociopaths will still get guns regardless of any gun laws, so let's just make it easier for them and hand them an uzi as they leave the psycho ward!
View Quote
.....Your parallel here, [b]guns/psycho's,[/b] leads me to think your not of this group's sentiments AT ALL!...man should never try new research[rolleyes]
View Quote
I don't understand your criticism of my reply. Can you clarify your point?
View Quote
......being 5 cans short of a 6pk,I believe there are no moral or religious reasons to look the other way on this step forward in Medical Trials/Research.As I said,Ban it here,it happens off shore.Why be foolish and let that happen.
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top