Your take on cloning and genetics.

Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.



The Omega
With such a wide distribution of people, from all over the world, I'm curious to learn your opinion on genetics and cloning.
Yes? No?

Ushgarak
I am cool with it.

But do remember that if this turns into a contentious debate that might have in the past belonged in the Debating forum, then I will probably close this.

The Omega

Kes
Kinda scary.You know playing God (thou I dont believe in God) stick out tongue
Its just so complex with so many things that can go wrong...Dolly wasn't made at the 1st try messed Plus she had all these health problems. Now imagine that in a human.
I guess it can be good and bad. Depends on who uses it.

skule
i like the aspect of genetic research and the idea of cloning certain cells to help diseases.

ChinaNiki
I worry about the use of genetics by insurance companies to deny coverage to people who are carriers of certain genes. Or to deny coverage to pregnant women who choose to have a baby who has been diagnosed before birth with spina bifida, downe's syndrome, cerebral palsy, muscular dystrophy, or other conditions that will require a lot of medical upkeep.

ragesRemorse
I think its a door in science if opened itll open many, many more doors of discovery. Goals in genetic cloning to find cures for paralysis and nerve damage,and organ transplants and if a cure for these problems lie within genetic cloning then i think its a must. However the people who want to clone humans just for the sake of cloning humans i think is totaly un nessicary. Humans already have the beautifull gift of being able to give life why do we need another source that is un pure.

h0ck3yh0rr0r
cloning sheeps and other animals are good for studies but cloning humans is wrong.

Dexx
i definitely agree w ith cloning helping in medical advancements. like cloning organs for transplants. But i'm against human cloning.
genetical tampering might bring us some advantages...but you know...it's a dangerous toy to play with. We'll see

buffymitch
I am against cloning but i'm all for genetic research. i'm not exactly well informed on this subject but i do know that there is a posibillity that they can cure a lot of diseases. the stem cells research sounds like a miracle. but cloning another human being just feels inhumane

Capt_Fantastic
It is our future. Cloning will, in the long run, both save and destroy humanity. You didn't really think those tall grey aliens were actually aliens, did you? That's us from the future. After we've genetically manipulated ourselves to the brink of extinction. But, really, I think the benefits of human cloning far out weight the disadvantages. I say we go for it full steam. All we have to do is get rid of the religious extremists and we can proceede the way god intended.

ChinaNiki
down with extremist!

Tex
I think they should clone headless humans, grow them in mechanical wombs (matrix) and harvest the organsbig grin

Ushgarak
"I worry about the use of genetics by insurance companies to deny coverage to people who are carriers of certain genes."

Are you saying insurers have no right to do that? And if so, why don't they? They are running a business, not a public service.

What you are actually worried about there is that by unlocking the understanding of genetics we will be able to tell who is better built than others- what we have been given by chance. This is, indeed, quite a Pandora's Box- but staying in ignorance is rarely a better option.

Tired Hiker
Let's say I lose an arm while disc golfing, right. I'd be all for the idea of cloning me a body part and attaching it back on, hence a new arm. Also cloning plants like tomatos and herbs is right on as well. I believe cloning is here to stay. I guess we'll find out if that George Lucas guy right.

ragesRemorse
why clone humans when the can already be made, genetic cloning is another thing but why waste time energy and funding on amking somthing we already can

Ushgarak
For people that cannot.

Dexx
it SHOULD not...tell me. anyone..i can't think of any reason(morally accepted) of clining humans.

Rogue Jedi
i dont condone cloning. its not natural.

Rogue Jedi
unless we are talking about troopers. big grin

ChinaNiki
"I worry about the use of genetics by insurance companies to deny coverage to people who are carriers of certain genes."

Are you saying insurers have no right to do that? And if so, why don't they? They are running a business, not a public service.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The problem comes in when someone cannot get insured for a condition that may never accur. You can have the gene marker for cancer, but you may never get it. But the insurance company won't care, they simply will not cover you. So if you don't have a lot of money, but make to much to be covered by medicare, you don't get any choice in your medical care. You end up using the emergency room to get antibiotics for a measly sinus infection or bronchitis. I understand not covering existing conditions, but to not cover someone because they carry the marker for a condition is ridiculous, but that is where we are headed.

Dagons Blade
Very well said, and the best take I have seen on the down side of this topic. Good job ChinaNiki. God knows that insurance companies raise their premiums whenever they see so called 'special' cases.
This could be a ghoulish opportunity for them to take advantage of people with preexisting conditions. sad

On the UP side,
God gave us brains, and if we use them to benefit society,
we aren't playing God, we're complementing God, because we are using the knowledge we have gained to better humanity.
I once heard a story about a little girl in Israel whose spine was severed, who, due to stem cells, was actually getting feeling back in her legs and she almost was able to walk again, until the research was cut short by the fatcat politicians who condemn the research (but yet they would probabaly use it themselves if THEY needed it.)

Ushgarak
But Chinaniki and DB, you are missing my point. Insurance companies run a BUSINESS, not a public service. They are there to make money. What possible moral obligation do they have to not act in the way that guarantees them the most profit? They deal in risk and if genetics shows up risk, that is just bad luck for that person

If it was Government or civil insurance, then fine, you should be covered regardless. But private companies? What right does anyone have to insist they insure higher risks? None at all. They insure whoever the heck they like using whatever criteria they like, the same way a shopkeeper sells what he wants to, at whatever price he chooses.

People tend to regard insurance as a right. It is NOT, it is a service you purchase and in providing that service they have the right to make higher risks pay more. And genetics is simply going to give them a more accurate assessment of who is and isn't at risk. You could even argue that this is actually more fair for the insurers, who after all deserve to actually know the risk of each person they insure- right now they are insuring in ignorance. This is how business works.

I am afraid people will just have to live with the problems- including higher insurance premiums- that are a result of what nature gives them.

I would also suggest, Chinaniki, that the situation you describe is a result of the lack of Public Service health care. In this country you do not need specific insurance, the National Health Service treats everyone (and being a public service, at no point does any citizen have to pay more for any existing conditions he or she has). So do not hold advances in genetics as accountable for the problems caused by the healthcare systems of SOME countries.

The Omega

Ushgarak
That was me who talked about natural, Omega.

ChinaNiki
Yes, insurance is a business, but if they start to use genetic marking as their basis for coverage, then they could decide to deny maternity coverage to couples who both carry certain gene markers just because there is an increased risk in a baby that could have that condition. Which could really cause complications cuz certain groups have more prevalence of certain conditions.

We have a hard enough time getting insurance companies to pay for what they are already contracted to pay for. You have to argue and harass them most of the time to pay the doctor for covered treatments. And then you have to go to their chosen network doctors, who may not be the best doctor for you.

Also, getting a public health care system that provides for everyone here is at this point impossible. The word "socialism" is used to describe systems that provide for public health care to everyone and this country is adaantly against anything remotely concerned with socialism, even if it's not actually socialist.

This is becoming interesting.big grin

Dagons Blade
Right on ChinaNiki. Insurance companies won't pay out as it is because they're afraid to do without their yearly bonuses, 600 dollar corinthian leather hairs and 300 dollar porcelain toilet seats with adjustable tempertaure to keep their cold hearted asses warm all year around.

Ushgarak, insurance may be a business, but the lives of human beings is NOT. You know damn well that ordinary people with certain conditions are looked down upon, while rich billionaires can persuade the companies to carry their policy, in return for a little extra something as gratitude for coveniently omitting the same rules that deny ordinary people the same coverage.

They won't pay out for someone who commits suicide,but yet if some big wig billionaire did it, the company would still pay out because Mr. Fat Bastard had the money to keep their special interests funded, right?

Human beings are all entitled to the same health care, and again, ChinaNiki points out very well that certain groups with "more prevalence of certain conditions." That's not fair.

Again, ducking out of this thread because no matter what I say, someone will take it wrong, and the world keeps on turning anyway, so what I say (or anyone says) really dosen't matter does it? **** it.

Ushgarak
"Yes, insurance is a business, but if they start to use genetic marking as their basis for coverage, then they could decide to deny maternity coverage to couples who both carry certain gene markers just because there is an increased risk in a baby that could have that condition. Which could really cause complications cuz certain groups have more prevalence of certain conditions."

Yes, they could. So what? That is their business. They have NO obligation to do otherwise. They can judge risk on whatever criteria they want.

"Also, getting a public health care system that provides for everyone here is at this point impossible. The word "socialism" is used to describe systems that provide for public health care to everyone and this country is adaantly against anything remotely concerned with socialism, even if it's not actually socialist."

So blame the system. Don't blame the advances in genetics. Dislike how health care works in your country if you want but that is not really a relevant point to Omega's questions.

"Right on ChinaNiki. Insurance companies won't pay out as it is because they're afraid to do without their yearly bonuses, 600 dollar corinthian leather hairs and 300 dollar porcelain toilet seats with adjustable tempertaure to keep their cold hearted asses warm all year around."

If you don't want it, don't use it. If you want it, don't blame them for making money out of that demand.

"Ushgarak, insurance may be a business, but the lives of human beings is NOT"

COMPLETELY irrelevant. Insurance is a business designed to turn profit. What human beings are has no impact on that at all.

"Human beings are all entitled to the same health care"

Not under a private health care system. In that you are entitled to what you pay for. Again, dislike that if you want, but that is not relevant to the subject.

"They won't pay out for someone who commits suicide,but yet if some big wig billionaire did it, the company would still pay out because Mr. Fat Bastard had the money to keep their special interests funded, right?"

May well do. That is BUSINESS. For the last time, insurance is business, NOT public service!

"Again, ducking out of this thread because no matter what I say, someone will take it wrong, and the world keeps on turning anyway, so what I say (or anyone says) really dosen't matter does it? **** it."

If you are going to have that immature attitude, then please, yes, stay away from these threads in future.

Now then, here is the big fact of it all: ALL genetic profiling n this sense will reveal is the TRUTH. You cannot say you do not want the truth to be known because some people might act on it- especially insurance companies who only want a more accurate assessment of the risks involved, which is their PURPOSE. It is the principle they already work by, this will just make them better at it.

And could you please both stop having a dig at insurance companies in general and remain on points connected to the subject? What you think of billionaires abusing the system could not be less relevant to the thread. Insurance companies using genetic profiling to help determine risk is entirely in accordance with how insurance works, and there is really nothing else to be added to that.

ragesRemorse
i asked why humans should be cloned when we can already produce them naturaly, and someone said for people who cant. Genetic expeirimentation is working on that, but as far as cloning for people who cant have children thats what adoption is for. overpopulation is already becomming a threat

ChinaNiki
I don't blame the advances in genetics, but I am concerned with those advances being used to hinder the medical coverage of people just because of genetic predisposition. I am totally in favor of stem cell research, but I fear an already failing medical system in this country going even further downhill because insurance companies can use genetics to decide who they will cover and who they won't. This doesn't only affect regular joes like me, but doctors as well. Hospitals are closing trauma units because they can't afford the insurance costs. Doctors in fields like obstetrics will not take on high risk patients because the insurance premiums are already skyhigh just to cover insurance costs for normal pregnancies.



In this country, if you get sick, you can't afford not to have insurance. But even then they still dictate what tests you can have. They called it managed care. It used to be a doctor was simply a doctor, now they have to be businessmen first and doctor's second.

ragesRemorse
yeah well people on welfare get the best coverage, my mom has been a nurse for 30 years and now works at blue cross bluesheild and some people on welfare get better coverage than her, thats whats sickening

ChinaNiki
too true
people in between are just up sh@t's crick

The Omega

Ushgarak
"i asked why humans should be cloned when we can already produce them naturaly, and someone said for people who cant. Genetic expeirimentation is working on that, but as far as cloning for people who cant have children thats what adoption is for. overpopulation is already becomming a threat"

Until they start banning people having children the normal way due to overpopulation, they should not ban people having children via genetic science either- that just denies opportunity to the less fortunate. Unlike insurance, having children IS a right and should be afforded equally to all.

Chinaniki and Ragesremorse, I believe I did just ask for peoplle NOT to turn this into a broad attack on the mechanics of insurance companies in your country. Omega is very right to point out its irrelevance, Please keep your arguments on-topic. I understand you are worried about the use insurance companies will make of genetic data but we know that know, it doesn't affect what Omega is asking, and further investigation into the behaviour of insurance is only a distraction. Thankyou.

Baylin
Cloning scares me. If they get it perfected, whos to say you cant be replaced by a clone, all they need is one small skin/hair sample and they have your entire genetic code then they can build a replacement you eek! blink

bigbadbike2
Not really. The choices you make determine who you are. The different circumstances form your character. Although the person coming after you sill have the exact code they will go through many different circumstances as they grow older. In truth they would be a totally different generation. More like children than your clone.

Baylin
Yeah but if you say didnt go along with something and was making a political waves and they wanted rid of you, instead of just disappearing you could be replaced by a specially conditioned clone. Not that I'm paranoid about government conspiracies or anything eek!

To be honest I'm not really paranoid, I actually think genetics is a good thing. Imagine your hearts been destroyed by disease. Instead of waiting for a donor and then having to spend the rest of your life an anti-rejection drugs they could just grow you a new heart tailor made to your own body guarenteed disease free with no hassles of rejection now that would be good!

bigbadbike2
Maybe even on day they could just insert certain Dna structures back into you failing organs causing them to regenerate.

BTW: Did you know that scientifically we should be able to regenerate. Scientists have said our bodily structure carries all the genitics to regenerate we just do not. They have yet to be able to explain why.

Dagons Blade
EDITED

Ushgarak
Dagon, I clearly said I did not want any more debate away from the topic. I CERTAINLY did not want what was basically abuse aimed at me.

Do not continue to ignore the rulings of the mods in future. Stay on-topic.

ragesRemorse
if you clone yourself an exact copy what makes you htink they wouldnt make the same decisions as you? human babies are unique evey child is different but a clone is by no means different thats why its even called a clone

Ushgarak
No, a clone is as different as your own child would be. Cloning that makes exact copies that think and act the same way is pure sci-fi.

ragesRemorse
i know that expierences and influences encourage our choices but it would still be you, and i diddnt mean that a clone of you would make the same exact choices you make but it would still think like you in some way

The Omega

Metroplex
cloning isn't rea;;y approved by religious groups and conservatives and i believe that is a major problem with its development. I think that the research should be explored for medical uses only and not for some wackos sick experiments.

Ushgarak
No, RR, it would not be 'you'- any more than a twin is, as Omega says,

The Omega

Capt_Fantastic
It would absolutely be you. Exactly the same, in most ways. I am a strong believer that we inherit a lot of our personality from our parents, genetically. To this day the way I walk, talk and move reminds my mother of my father. My father died when I was nine and my parents separated when I was six. A lot of the adult things I do remind her of him. We even write the same. Right handed, but with a left handed slant to it. Our 7's are exactly the same, very distinct.
Not only do I look just like my father, but I act just like him too. (according to my mother, who's fond of saying: You like lookin' down that straight arrogant nose at the rest of the world, CONTRARY!... just like your father)
So, no the exact thought patterns would be different, but a lot of the subconscious idiosyncrasies would be the same. Environment is very relevant to delevopment, but not the be all and end all. Genetics and parents have a lot to do with it too. So, I would assume that a lot of personality traits you have would be inherited by your clone.

That being said, I still think cloning is a good thing.

Ushgarak
No... seriously, it would not be you at all, I rather trust the scientists on this...

Capt_Fantastic
That last post should have said "in many ways" rather than "most ways"

Don't misunderstand. I do not subscribe to the theory that if you cloned Hitler, we'd get the same world conquring madman we had the first time around. Not at all. But, his clone would not only look just like him, but could possibly also have the same personality quirks that the original did. I'm not saying it'll be the exact same person, just that a lot of personality is passed on from parent to child or original host to clone, presumably

ragesRemorse
if only it were all as simple as muliplicity

Ushgarak
Err... it would look SIMILAR to you. It would not actually look like the same person.

Capt_Fantastic
similar?

~fuoco~
I dunno, I'm against and for it! It's playing with God, and just not natural, but on the other hand, I would want another me running around the world causing havoc! WE NEED MORE LUANA S' IN THIS WORLD!!

Dagons Blade
EDITED- ON TOPIC COMMENTS ONLY; UNJUSTIFED INSULTS WILL NOT BE TOLERATED

ragesRemorse
we need more maura's and daves to, i never met a dave i diddnt like and maura's are usually always hot

Ushgarak
DB, you only proved yourself wrong trying to say that things aren't worth worrying about and that you will not obsess and you refuse to get upset, simply by having made that reply. If it were true, you wouldn't have come back here to say anything.

"as well as being someone who obviously dosen't give a damn about people"

Now, THAT is just an insult, and hasty and utterly incorrect one at that. I won't stand for such an unjustified attack against ANY member and on a personal note I am grossly insulted that you could possibly interpret what I say like that.

I have already warned you once in this thread, Dagon. Now you are continuing with disruptive and offensive behaviour, and did not keep things on topic like I clearly asked. This is now an official warning. Post like that again and you will receive a ban.

diegocala
**runs to the corner** huddles with younger clone**

Crash_Overload
I am all for clonning. We are getting better and better at it. So why stop? (deos anybody really beleive that theos Reliens really clonned humans?) The 1st perfect clone was not done in the first try. more like the 100th. but the seconde was done in like 75 tries. The people who are afraid of lets say clonning hitler and going into WW3, no prob. He won't even be like that. Because see, the way you are raised has a lot to do with your beleifs. That is why, most kids born in a familly without god, have no say in religion and most don't even want to know more. But lets say, you clone Einstein, then he will be smart. Scientist studied his brain(no joke) and discovered that it went 5 times faster then any average brain. It all depends. We could also clone extinct speacieas. (maybe no like Jurrasic Park, tho it WOULD be fun to see a veloceraptor around) Like the dodo bird or the tazmanian tiger. We could also help dieing specease like the Peragreen falcon or the tiger. It is for the good of every one.

Alos, we CAN clone organs. Lets say some one needs a liver transplant, but has no compatible donars. then that is when a cloned liver would be usefull. Clonning can possibly be the answer for green peace in the aide of animals, or just medical science. Cloning IS the answer.

diegocala
In the 70's people had the same kind of fear about Test-tube babies. Now in vitro fertilization is a common treatment for infertility as well as other situations
I say give it time...

The Omega

Crash_Overload
Where in the name of Jeboody did you get that from?????

Capt_Fantastic
Maybe, but what about the other things? The hand writing, the personal habits, the drinking, the smoking, the things we say? I know the first five years are the most formative, but a lot of these things happened long after he left when I was seven. We even pronounce things the same way. People are always asking me if I'm from the north. (not that that's better than being from the south)

I'm just saying it isn't all exposure to our environment. I think we get a lot more from our parents, genetically speaking, than we realize.

The Omega

Tex
Do you know if you clone your cat or dog, it wont be born the same color or size or have the same physical characteristics and personality? It will look like an entirely different animal but will be 100% genetically identical.
Isn't that weird?

Well the personality difference isn't but everything else isbig grin

Crash_Overload
I mean from what I posted before, I never uttered a word about aliens.... oh and just read the history or starting thing from www.rael.org and click on summery, AND DON'T STOP READING!!!!! (i don't believe in any of it, but it is pretty conviencing... the story is concret and can not be proved otherwise....)

The Omega

Crash_Overload
yup. forgivness accepted. but i played a part in that, i misspelled raelians, sorry. Let it be noted.

I would like to hear what others have to say about www.rael.org and there say on "how humanity started" (which HAS to do with clonning)

ragesRemorse
i saw that movie where aliens were clones of humans in the future, that was a good movie, and you know i had that same appifany that guy rael had until the acid wore off.

ragesRemorse
ive heard of eternal acid trips and after reading that im sure they exist

Crash_Overload
They Do. Just look At Ozzy Osborn.........

ragesRemorse
that man is smart though, what better way to become a number one author than to convince a million people into a new belief. everytime he writes a book thats a guarenteed million copies sold

ragesRemorse
ozzy has just became a drug thats all lol

Ushgarak
If you want to see a film that gives perpsective on this kind of thing, try GATTACA. The only problem with that film being that the guy SHOULD have died at the end. You are emant to think it is discriminatory against him that he would not be allowed on the space programme because he has a genetic heart coniditon. Huh? They wouldn't let anyone TODAY on a spaceship with a weak heart! That's not because they are being evil, but because it will most likely kill you on take off!

But the rest of it is rather good- though it does depend on us being able to custom design babies, and the inevitable two-tier system in society that results.

It also, incidentally, has one of my favourite wuick conversation exchanges ever, when the policeman is interviewing the guy in charge of the GATTACA institute, with all the highly fit genetically desinged people exercising in the background. The policeman asks what the exercises are for, and the head (played by Gore Vidal) says he has them all tested regularly.

"But if they are all so superior, why do you need to test them?"
"Simply to make sure they are living up to their potential."
"Or exceeding it?"
"No-one exceeds their potential."
"And if they did?"
"That would simply mean that we did not accurately gauge their potential."

Which is not only a neat reminder of what the word potential MEANS- it is something you can NEVER exceed because your potential, by definition, is ALL you can do- but it is part of the lesson of the film that no matter how accurately you can map someone's skills and body genetically, you will never accurately assess what they can do.

But that is still no excuse for a man with a dodgy heart going on a space flight...

Anyway, the big dig deal in GATTACA is the fact that babies can be designed to be strong, healthy, clever, well-behaved (and in a sequence cut from the film, heterosexual- removed because of the dodginess of whrther it is genetic (no debates on that plase, that is just why they removed it))- but it COSTS, so only the rich can have babies like that.

So it might be very important that genetic development is always public sector, but that seems unlikely. We may otherwise end up in a world like GATTACAs- which is not a BAD world, it is full of bright, strong, healthy, ambitious people making great strides forwards for the human race; just that it is also full of an underclass of genetically 'poor' people whom no-one will give a decent job to.

The Omega

Ushgarak
Actually, in GATTACA they said he WOULD have a heart problem. If we thereofre say he did not, this could only be because that the genetic profiling was erroneous. I really don;t think that suited the film, when everything ELSE about the genetic profiling was 100% right- that was what the film was exploring, after all.

The Omega

Ushgarak
In any case, regardless of the means via which the problem was discovered, we wouldn;t put people with even POTENTIAL heart problems on the space programme in the modern day. It is just too big a risk.

ragesRemorse
man the whole thing with him not developing a heart disease was just to get the point across that anyhting is possible and that you make your own destiny

Ushgarak
... which only works if it makesout the genetic profiling is WRONG, which undermines the set-up of the society. None of us have much to fear from genetic profiling if it doesn't work, do we? If it was unreliable then that system would not exist.

No, the fear of the whole genetic thing is based around what if it does, indeed, tell us the truth?

diegocala
hmmmmm

Ushgarak
I believe the probability they gave him of having a dodgy heart in the film was 99%- that is a 99% chance he would have died on take-off. Something his employers deserved to know! Like I say, it's the only part of the film that didn't quite work. The rest of it- you don't need to be enhanced to be clever, being enchanced doesn't guarantee you luck or happiness- and the society what it might create- was all bang on.

ragesRemorse
if he did die on take off, then it would belittle the whole movie and his efforts of being somthing he was told he couldnt. To me the movie was about humanity and the will that humans posses to become somthing more. in life and in most movies there is always somthing standing in the way of a "hero" whether it be a foe or an intagible force and in this movie the foe was genetics. an un forseen destiny ar birth standing in the way of his dream. If he died at the end it would basically be saying dont chase dreams or wish for somthing more because its a futile fight, thats what i took away from the movie atleast

Ushgarak
Yes, but that is still contrary to the whole point about it being a world where people's genetic dispositions are known with almost total accuracy.

ANYWAY. Best not get bogged down with this outside the movie area!

Big Evil
Most of you probably didn't think of the most realistic yet cynical case scenario of cloning. It isn't an army of supermen to opress us, or mankind being used as cattle fodder. (Though these are in the equasions as well.)

The real threat is indennity theft.

Yes members, indenity theft. Where does YOU begin and stop? The genetic code of your being? The "soul"? Be prepared to give an answer because if liberals have thier way you'll be sharing what is rightfuly "you" with your clone. Court battles will be fought if you get to be Mrs.Nesbit or have to have a new idennity because the courts said your clone deserved it moreso.

There will also be affirmative action taken against clones, despite how they didn't HAVE to exsist.

There will also be moral questions such as "is it cheating on my spouse if I sleep with thier clone?" and don't think for one second this won't come up.

You could try and argue that if they are your clone they think like you do and therfore wouldn't subject themselves to such debautchery and confusion, but again, where does you begin and end? Is it true we're just organism and know actual soul inherits our body? If so you have nothing to worry about.. a little..

Even if there is no soul outside exposure takes a toll on our personality, having to come to terms that you are a copy of this man or woman is alot to bare. It could possibly be mentaly scarring. So much questioning of who we are, and what is rightfuly our's, and the legal system will be on it's knees with everything from infidelity to murder because all things we've been given to tell one person from another would become moot.

And here I thought liberals wanted everyone to be an individual..

Napalm
I really dont care

qubit
Originally posted by Napalm
I really dont care

But you care about making people understand that you don't care?

Thank you for your considered and inspirational exploration into your personal nihilist philosophy.

Sniper_sloth
There are two ways it can go, in my opinion.

Either we'll do the sensible thing and learn to use clones as a slave caste, or, we'll do the not so sensible thing and some third world idiot country will try to use clones to upset the balance of millitary power.

Since clones are by definition not natural beings, they do not deserve any sort of 'human' rights. They aren't humans, their clones. Created synthetically for a pre-determined purpose. Frankly I have no problem with a caste of clone slaves. We could just breed them to be intelligent but submissive. It wouldn't be difficult.

qubit
Originally posted by Sniper_sloth
There are two ways it can go, in my opinion.

Either we'll do the sensible thing and learn to use clones as a slave caste, or, we'll do the not so sensible thing and some third world idiot country will try to use clones to upset the balance of millitary power.

Since clones are by definition not natural beings, they do not deserve any sort of 'human' rights. They aren't humans, their clones. Created synthetically for a pre-determined purpose. Frankly I have no problem with a caste of clone slaves. We could just breed them to be intelligent but submissive. It wouldn't be difficult.

Good example of the kind of mentality we should be concerned about.

whirlysplat
I have genetics and if I have identical twins they will be clones confused just not of me but of each other!

Genetics joke:

Question: Where do you find Mitosis?
Answer: On the end of my feetsis smile


Sorry bad joke probably caused by frame-shift or deletion mutation big grin

whirlysplat
Seriously clones of adult cells develop Cancer very quickly due to the "VCR Recorder" effect. i.e. Dolly the sheep sad

Darth Revan
Originally posted by The Omega
With such a wide distribution of people, from all over the world, I'm curious to learn your opinion on genetics and cloning.
Yes? No?

Could be useful, for making new human livers and stuff. But cloning entire humans is a little creepy... I don't really want ten of anybody walking around messed

Fire
I agree with DR for different reasons tho
:P

Darth Revan
Originally posted by Sniper_sloth
There are two ways it can go, in my opinion.

Either we'll do the sensible thing and learn to use clones as a slave caste, or, we'll do the not so sensible thing and some third world idiot country will try to use clones to upset the balance of millitary power.

Since clones are by definition not natural beings, they do not deserve any sort of 'human' rights. They aren't humans, their clones. Created synthetically for a pre-determined purpose. Frankly I have no problem with a caste of clone slaves. We could just breed them to be intelligent but submissive. It wouldn't be difficult.

Clones aren't somehow genetically inferior. Using clones as slaves is a very stupid, shortsighted idea. It would turn into a huge, "are clones human" type of debate, like we had when people were starting to question the same thing with african slaves.

And to say it wouldn't be difficult clearly shows that you have no idea how complex the human genome is.

lilmisskitten
I personally don't agree with it it kinda ruins the idea that everyones unique its not natural don't we have enough man made things, and how would they feel on acount that they have been cloned

Capt_Fantastic
I'm all for cloning. Not just a liver...but the whole damn show! Genetic research and cloning are the future of the human species...even if the bible thumpers want to deny that as fact. I say, if there's a god who alone creates life...lets clone someone and see if it has a soul or emotions. At that point, I would hope the debate on gods abolute power would be over. It's something equivelent to finding life on another planet.

Darth Revan
The bad thing about cloning is that if it ever got to the point where the majority of the population were clones of somebody, genetic diversity would go down the tubes. There's a reason animals reproduce sexually, and it's because we need genetic diversity to evolve, and ultimately to survive.

Capt_Fantastic
Originally posted by Darth Revan
The bad thing about cloning is that if it ever got to the point where the majority of the population were clones of somebody, genetic diversity would go down the tubes. There's a reason animals reproduce sexually, and it's because we need genetic diversity to evolve, and ultimately to survive.


Let's not remove from the facts that humans are animals too. Animals that seem to enjoy reproducing. Don't worry, I highly doubt that sex will become unpopular among humans.

Darth Revan
So do I, but humans are rather unusual in that we are one of the few animals who have sex for the purpose of having sex... Not always with the intention of actual reproduction. It's not inconceivable that somebody could decide actual sexual reproduction is obsolete once cloning is perfected.

whirlysplat
We are reaching a point when we can produce the shifts in DNA without evolution. Say I gave as a physical example everyone, Greg Lamont's resting pulse rate, or Sugar Ray Leonards nervous system etc, etc.

Darth Revan
Phenotype changing doesn't affect genotype. If I cut off my right arm, will my children be born without right arms? Of course not.

Sniper_sloth
Cloning creates an imperfect copy. It is by definition second or third or whichever number class. Not a first class being.

Q: 'Are clones human?'

A: No. They are clones.They were not born in a womb after 9 months of gestation created by a father and mother. They are therefore not human and therefor have no legal power to oppose being utterly exploited.

Capt_Fantastic
Originally posted by Darth Revan
Phenotype changing doesn't affect genotype. If I cut off my right arm, will my children be born without right arms? Of course not.

So, how many right arms will he be born with?

Capt_Fantastic
Originally posted by Sniper_sloth
Cloning creates an imperfect copy. It is by definition second or third or whichever number class. Not a first class being.

Q: 'Are clones human?'

A: No. They are clones.They were not born in a womb after 9 months of gestation created by a father and mother. They are therefore not human and therefor have no legal power to oppose being utterly exploited.


if they have no father or mother...then how did they get here?

Sniper_sloth
Synthetically of course. The cloning processes I speak of are impossible at this time because the technology doesn't exist yet. However if cloning is pursued, it is likely that within the space of a few generations the technology I am addressing will exists. Pre-supposing foreward thinking people who aren't overly moralistic buffoons are able to have access.

whirlysplat
Identical twins are clones of each other.

whirlysplat
Originally posted by Darth Revan
Clones aren't somehow genetically inferior. Using clones as slaves is a very stupid, shortsighted idea. It would turn into a huge, "are clones human" type of debate, like we had when people were starting to question the same thing with african slaves.

And to say it wouldn't be difficult clearly shows that you have no idea how complex the human genome is.

Clones are only geentically inferior in the sense if they are adult clones they will develop old age diseases that much quicker.

Cloning humans would not be difficult just very expensive, and you would need a lot of female wombs (in vivo) to get the probability of one growing after fertilisation has taken place in vitro.

DarkCrawler
I believe that in 25-50 years, the cloning of humans is accepted...in 50-80 years, countries start to use clones in army...imagine, clones with genetic tampering in them. They could be superstrong, superfast, superintelligent...perfect soldiers.

pr1983
Originally posted by DarkCrawler
I believe that in 25-50 years, the cloning of humans is accepted...in 50-80 years, countries start to use clones in army...imagine, clones with genetic tampering in them. They could be superstrong, superfast, superintelligent...perfect soldiers.

"when captain america etc..."

theReject
Cloning itself is not a truly big issue. I mean, there are already natural clones...twins. The big issue should be transgenics! big grin

Imperial_Samura
I am all for cloning, genetics, and even transgenics. Humanity is somewhat unique as we are at the point (nearly) where we could theoretically control our own evolution and push the bounderies of what is possible, and I think that, in the long run, is a thing is good. With the knowledge and ability such areas could really help humanity. Yes, there is always the "but it could be used for the wrong reasons" arguments, but that is true for anything really, and I have never liked the religious arguments to do with the subject.

theReject
I'm actually taking a course on it now. At first I thought cloning was this beyond human capability we're trying to mess with but now I see it's not that hard of a procedure. And while I may agree there are really no moral repercussions around cloning, why the crap would anyone want to clone themselves, and give birth to themselves? That's just odd...

Bardock42
Originally posted by theReject
I'm actually taking a course on it now. At first I thought cloning was this beyond human capability we're trying to mess with but now I see it's not that hard of a procedure. And while I may agree there are really no moral repercussions around cloning, why the crap would anyone want to clone themselves, and give birth to themselves? That's just odd...

Well itz actually seems pretty plausible to me....

joeykangaroo
i think its dodgey to mess with things like cloning but for some reason i think its not that bad..its a step forward anyway

Oswald Kenobi
Originally posted by theReject
I'm actually taking a course on it now. At first I thought cloning was this beyond human capability we're trying to mess with but now I see it's not that hard of a procedure. And while I may agree there are really no moral repercussions around cloning, why the crap would anyone want to clone themselves, and give birth to themselves? That's just odd...

How are there no moral repercussions? Your opinion please.

SolomnicKnight
i'm cool with it i mean i think it should be allowed if its for medical reasons, i.e abortions happen so why toss the fetal tissue away if via genetics and cloning of cells it can help the living why jus let the aborted die for no reason at all. We might as well use it to help the living who exist in sickness and pain.

SolomnicKnight
moral repercussions? is it immoral to save life, in my opinion stem cell research is pro-life

Oswald Kenobi
Originally posted by SolomnicKnight
moral repercussions? is it immoral to save life, in my opinion stem cell research is pro-life

stem cell research and the attempt to clone a human being are two totally different things. Please tell me how cloning a human saves a life.

grey fox
cloning is askign for toruble who knows what it will evnetually lead too ......

Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.