Thread: Why is cloning "profoundly wrong"?

Originally Posted by Seraphim

So, why not then simply create a clone of whomever needs medical help, but then you can stop that clone's development at whatever pre-determined (or rather yet to be determined) point in gestation before it actually gains rights as a human being? Perform a legal abortion and harvest your brandy-new people-parts.

I mean, embryonic stem cells belong to who knows what kind of people, why not be sure of the stem cells, or spare body parts, you will be recieving will be a good genetic match, right?

At this point though you are trudging through the murky waters of abortion, religion, etc.. Especially when you speak in terms of gestation and gaining rights.

Some have proffered the idea of growing, for lack of a better term, dead humans. Those without brains so that the argument could be made that they are not sentient and therefor devoid of life. Not sure if that would satisfy most but personally I think its kinda creepy.

Originally Posted by Seraphim

So, why not then simply create a clone of whomever needs medical help, but then you can stop that clone's development at whatever pre-determined (or rather yet to be determined) point in gestation before it actually gains rights as a human being? Perform a legal abortion and harvest your brandy-new people-parts.

I mean, embryonic stem cells belong to who knows what kind of people, why not be sure of the stem cells, or spare body parts, you will be recieving will be a good genetic match, right?

Problem is, say you need a new heart. You can't use a fetal heart to replace your adult heart.



Scott

Sci-Fi maybe, but then again so was the computer, the robot, the cell phone, space travel.

It will happen one day and since we can already grow ears on mice and better yet grow heart muscle out of a printer I think we are closer than most of us would like to be.

Not only that (fetal heart vs adult heart) at the point that I, personally would likely fall withthe whole "when does it become a human" line of thought would be far before there would be organs or parts anywhere close to being able to funtion in an adult.

In order to have a problem with human cloning I'd first have to have a lack of faith in the human race now or even eons into the future to use such science responsibly, peacefully and to the greater good rather than to exploit, subdue, dominate or exterminate.





Ya gotta love us humans; we crack me up.

Chris L

Originally Posted by jockeys

guess i've never really understood why some people think a clone shouldn't have rights.

Large population booms on election years?

Originally Posted by smokelaw1

Not only that (fetal heart vs adult heart) at the point that I, personally would likely fall withthe whole "when does it become a human" line of thought would be far before there would be organs or parts anywhere close to being able to funtion in an adult.

Meh, hop up those fetal organs on some steroids, and it'll grow like a weed.

Scientists will be able to figure out those small details.

Originally Posted by singlewedge

Sci-Fi maybe, but then again so was the computer, the robot, the cell phone, space travel.

It will happen one day and since we can already grow ears on mice and better yet grow heart muscle out of a printer I think we are closer than most of us would like to be.

I kind of doubt it. Assuming we can make the embryo grow into a fullsize human adult body somehow (which is admittedly the easier problem) then we still have a serious problem with the brain.

Assuming that a physically identical brain (all the molecules and electric charges are identical) actually contains the same memories and stuff, which is a big assumption and in no way guaranteed to work, we still have the problem of mapping all the neurons so we can build an exact copy. Currently, mapping all the neurons exceeds the computational power of every single computer on the planet, running in unison for a thousand years. But, they make better computers all the time, so we'll skip that.

We still can't map the physical brain with the necessary level of detail because Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle makes it utterly impossible to do that without screwing up our map. Regardless of what science may do, this principle is regarded as absolute (on the molecular level, especially, and the quantum level as well.) and CANNOT BE BROKEN OR AVOIDED.

It'll never happen.

Originally Posted by Seraphim

Meh, hop up those fetal organs on some steroids, and it'll grow like a weed.

Scientists will be able to figure out those small details.

OK, then, I actually removed a portion of my post, then went back and removed more, but you hit on exactly what I said (part of it anyway).
If there is no brain, go ahead and grow (and harvest) those organs inside a woman. If you can do it without having to kill a person, why not? (insert disclaimer: I do not blieve that we can at this point grow organs viable for use in adults fast enough in vitiro that the "embryo" would still be in early enough stages of development for this to be morally acceptable). There are other issues, of course, such as the woman being used as a growth chamber for another persons (using myself as an example here) medical needs. Can't we just grown brainless organs/organ donors in a lab? That would be so much easier, morally speaking. I mean, sure, it's creepy, but if you believe, as I do, that humans are not humans without a funtioning brain, it really is the same as just growing a heart in a dish, right?

Not to mention, I can't even remember all of my memories, so why should my clone be able to?