Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Cloning
America's Debate > Archive > Assorted Issues Archive > [A] Science and Technology
Pages: 1, 2
Google
Cyan
As you've probably been hearing on the news, and Italian doctor has claimed that there is a woman who will give birth to a human clone in early January. I'm curious to know what everyone's views on cloning are.
Google
Kisov
In almost all situations I am in support of all medical technological breakthroughs and research; but I just can't get behind this whole human cloning thing. Even if this is used just for medical purposes (like organ donors); it is still just plain wrong. Can you even imagine human farms, where people are being cloned for their spare parts. There is just something morally wrong with that. And even if it is just used by the rich to have a clone of themselves to have a way of living beyond their years; that is just sick and wrong, as well. If these human clones are already in the oven, so to speak, then I guess their is nothing that anyone can do to stop them. By studying them it may be possible to solve some of the nurture vs. nature debates, which would be very interesting. If they are going to be born anyway; we might as well learn something from them.

-Kisov
Cyan
What about cloning endangered animals?
Cyan
QUOTE(Kisov @ Nov 30 2002, 07:22 PM)
Can you even imagine human farms, where people are being cloned for their spare parts.

I'm not terribly familiar with the process of cloning. This is kind of a learn as you go topic for me, but I think the goal is to be able to clone individual organs without creating another lifeform. For example, if you needed to have a kidney transplant, they would take cell data from your body and develop a kidney that was completely compatible. I don't know that they currently have this technology, however. I'll have to do some research.
Kisov
QUOTE
What about cloning endangered animals?


Interesting question. . . .I still don't think I would agree with it. The scientist would only be duplicated the genetic code of an exsisting endangered species, if these genetically identical species would start reproducing in the wild, it would start causing serious birth defects and other retardation of the species. Maybe if they only coloned each of the endangered once or twice, that may be ok . They would at least be able to maintain some sort of genetic diversity.

-Kisov
Kisov
If the cloning of individual organs became possible; than I would be in favor of that. But, as I understand it, the only cloning currently practiced is the cloning of a whole organism, because a living incubator is necessary. I just can't see a woman giving birth to a kidney. tongue.gif But, who knows what the future holds.

-Kisov
Cyan
QUOTE(Kisov @ Nov 30 2002, 07:49 PM)
If the cloning of individual organs became possible; than I would be in favor of that.  But, as I understand it, the only cloning currently practiced is the cloning of a whole organism, because a living incubator is necessary.  I just can't see a woman giving birth to a kidney. tongue.gif But, who knows what the future holds.

tongue.gif The imagery in this thread is rather surreal...

I've been doing some research and everything that I've found regarding human organ cloning involves one cell that must be implanted into some form of embryo, whether that be animal or human.

I agree with you regarding genetic diversity, but it seems that it would be quite positive to clone several different endangered animals of the same species in conjunction with breeding programs, specifically with animals that are difficult to breed in captivity.

What about a situation where one parent holds genetic traits that they don't want to pass onto their children. Would you agree with taking the genetic material from one parent and creating a clone? Also, an argument that I have heard related to this is fusing an egg and a sperm and then duplicating it. Then, scientists could perform tests on one, which is completely identical, to see if the child is genetically sound. If it is, they would allow the other to develop into a human being. If not, they would terminate it. I can see some major ethical arguments developing out of this idea.
David
It just doesnt seem right to me. It seems like we as humans are trying to play god. I dont think that is right. As previously stated if they could just clone single organs I would definately be in favor of that and its extension of human life.
Danya
QUOTE(David @ Nov 30 2002, 07:32 PM)
It just doesnt seem right to me.  It seems like we as humans are trying to play god.  I dont think that is right.  As previously stated if they could just clone single organs I would definately be in favor of that and its extension of human life.

Here is an example, and it's a true story.

My neice married her husband a couple of years ago. They are 22 years old. They have a one year old baby and she is 6 months pregnant. They were very happy.

While her husband was working out of town he was in a car accident. He is now paralyzed (t6?) from the waist down and in a wheel chair. He needs assistance because he has a catheter as well. The doctors have said his prognosis for ever walking again are zero.

Stem cell research is one of his only hopes for finding a way to repair the damage. Christopher Reeve is one of the people that have been helping to get this approved. Right now it's only allowed for a very small number of stem cells. This is a far different thing than growing an entire person and harvesting their body for parts. It's only a replication of cells for organs.

But some people 'just don't like the idea' because it might be 'playing God'. So, if you don't believe in God you suffer anyway.
Not that anyone really knows WHAT God would think of it. mad.gif
Cyan
A ban on cloning would, as I understand it, hinder progress when it comes to stem cell research, because once a stem-cell treatment is found, the cells would need to be replicated via cloning. I think that there are several issues to consider when it comes to cloning, so let's break it down a bit.

Is it okay to clone:
1. stem-cells
2. animals
3. human beings

Each of these branches off into separate issues, as well, but this is a good start.
Google
David
You really like to attack me dont you. I never talked about stem cell research I only discussed cloning full human beings and if you dont believe in God you are already in bad shape and destined for Hell. Sorry if that offends you but it is true.
Mike
David has been warned numerous times in the past three days, and can't seem to follow the rules.

He is banned.

Mike
Danya
He is welcome to believe I will spend eternity in a fiery pit of hell. But he is not welcome to keep others from treatment over his beliefs. He is young and brainwashed so I didn't take him too seriously.
Jaime
And now back to our regularly scheduled topic....

Historically, major technological breakthroughs have railroaded the status quo. It used to be blasphemous to say the earth was not the center of the universe. It was also immoral to suggest the world was round, not flat.

Today we are at a similar crossroads. I see stem cell research railroading any moral belief system that might attempt to stop it by suggesting scientists are "playing god". It doesn't matter if they are playing god or not. If there is a demand for the technology someone will supply it, be it here in the US or elsewhere in the world.
turnea
The biggest worry is that people will be given less rights because they are clones. I think there is very little opossition if it were possible to clone and grow tissue. But all human organisms should have their lives protected. This complaint sort of crosses paths with the abortion debate in that those who see no problem with killing fetuses also have no problem killing embryos which are a result of cloning.
Wertz
Cyan: My opinions...

Is it okay to clone:
1. stem-cells - Sure - the potential advantages in terms of medical research and treatments far outweigh any ethical concerns.
2. animals - If we're talking about entire organisms, I wouldn't support this - not even endangered species. While I'm as supportive of protecting endangered species as anyone, I do sometimes feel that maybe there's an environmental reason for certain species to be dying out - a sort of culling of the ecosystem. It concerns me that too much human meddling may create imbalances which could result in damage to other species (upsetting the predator/prey ratio, for example, or seriously disrupting the food chain). If we can't salvage a threatened species by protection and controlled breeding, I feel that we, as a species, have probably done enough meddling.
3. human beings - Again, if we're talking about entire organisms, no - definitely not. Especially if "used by the rich to have a clone of themselves to have a way of living beyond their years". I can think of nothing more horrific. I mean, one George W Bush was enough of a mistake - can you imagine such a thing living on in perpetuity? AAAAAAAGH!!! Of course, these are exactly the sort of people who will be clandestinely investigating and funding this sort of research, regardless of what they might say about stem cell research or anything else on the political platform. And for exactly those reasons: immortality. A truly frightening thought.

Organ cloning, if possible, would be a whole different story...
Danya
First of all, I am a uncomfortable with the thought of cloning people. But, let's say it does happen. What does that mean? If you were sitting on the bus next to someone would you have any idea they were a clone? No, because they are their own person, they have the same rights as any other person not to be put in a freezer for extra parts. They can't be grown in any other place but a womb. Meaning once it's a delivered it has the same rights as all other infants. Even if they did clone Bush *shudder* he would not actually BE Bush. The nurture vs. nature thing, the experiences of his life, would make him his own person and they would share traits but not be identical. I still don't like this idea for the implications it could have on the gene pool that we can't understand yet.

As for the stem cell research, these embryos are being created by women who WANT children and go for invitro treatments. They create multiple embryo's to increase their chances for conceiving. When they are left over they are either thrown away, donated for other couples to use. Of course, I see a huge difference between the embryo in a petri dish and a complete living breathing person so I don't have a problem with it.

But if there are complaints they should be directed to the couples who spend thousands and thousands of dollars for these infertility treatments instead of adopting all those unwanted babies.
Cyan
Okay, I should add my own thoughts to this since I started the thread. My opinion on this is not well formed, and I'm definitely open to ideas.

1. Stem-cells - I support this. There is a huge difference between cloning a cell and cloning a being. I can't see a lot of ethical problems with this, and there are huge advantages to stem cell research. There are ethical issues surrounding the method by which these cells are obtained, but I think we've got another thread going on that particular issue.

2. Animals - I can see the potential for disaster if this wasn't handled properly because of the delicate balance of the ecosystem and the need for genetic diversity, but I'm not opposed to it in conjunction with captive breeding programs. There are certainly issues to consider such as making sure that the current environment is capable of supporting a larger number of certain species, but this is something that needs to be considered within captive breeding programs regardless of how the animals are being bred.

There has been a lot of talk about cloning pets that pass on, and even though the cloned pet is an entirely different animal with its own personality traits, I have somewhat of a problem with this, because I think that death and grieving is a natural process that should be observed. This is my personal opinion, though, and I have a choice to not patronize companies that would offer this service. If someone feels differently than I do, so be it. I don't see any large-scale problems with this unless people were cloning more than one copy of their animals.

Other issues involve cloning purebred animals to help retain desirable traits. Again, this gets into the genetic diversity issue. I can see a lot of problems developing out this, specifically because there are already problems with a lack of genetic diversity in pure-bred breeding programs. Evidence of this is readily available when looking at pure bred dogs, and the disorders and diseases that plague certain breeds.

Certainly, with all of these issues, there would need to be rules and regulations attached otherwise it could be like opening Pandoraís box, but to ban them all together doesnít make sense to me. There are practical applications for cloning that shouldnít be ignored, specifically in regards to the preservation of the environment.

3. Humans - This one is the stickiest aspect of the cloning debate, and perhaps Iíve read too much science fiction, because it makes my imagination go wild. I envision armies of genetically engineered human clones and super geniuses, caste systems, body farms, etc., but these ideas are a worst case scenario, and they symbolize a result that would have to be born out of a complete lack of ethics. Iím not saying that it couldnít happen, because I suppose that anything is possible, but I donít think that itís likely. This is definitely something thatís worth talking about, and there are a lot of possible scenarios.

We know that a human clone is exactly that: human. They would have the same aspects physically, emotionally, and mentally as a human that was conceived sexually. We also know that through genetic manipulation, clones do not have to be exact replicas of the body that they were cloned from. This science is in its beginning stages, however, and there is a high risk of failure involved.

So letís look at some of these scenarios:


1. Genetically modifying and cloning individuals for certain functions in society Ė This would be equivalent to removing freedom of choice, and I feel that every individual deserves to choose their own path in life.

2. Caste systems Ė I can definitely see something like this developing in a society where some people were born via sexual means and some were genetically engineered and cloned. It could go two different ways. Those born via sexual means could look down on cloned individuals for being born in a way that is not traditionally natural for humans. They may see them as being less human for this. Genetically engineered individuals may look down on those born via sexual means, because they are not genetically perfect. This issue is addressed in the film Gattica, which was quite interesting.

3. Body farms Ė This is a bit farfetched in my opinion, and through stem-cell research, as I understand it, they hope to find a way to manufacture organs without having to develop an entire being. I donít quite understand how this will work, and I havenít been able to find a good source on this one, so any input is welcome.

4. Cloning of historic figures Ė Wertz & Danya both mentioned interesting aspects of this issue. While Danyaís point about the nurture vs. nature is valid, I can also see potential problems. There is the question to consider: How much of our behavior is genetic and how much is learned?

5. Cloning in the situation where one parent risks passing on undesirable genetic material to his/her children. One parent could be cloned. There are other avenues of research involved in this, as well, such as genetically modifying the parent with the undesirable trait, but like cloning, gene therapy is in its beginning phases.

6. Homosexual couples that want to have a baby, but donít have the means to do so. Lesbians have the option of artificial insemination, but for gay men, this is not an option. This branches off into several other areas of debate, as well. Also, as I understand it, they donít currently have the means to take the genetic material from both parents and merge it into the clone, but with technological research, this may be a viable option in the future.

7. Designer babies Ė This is more related to genetic engineering than cloning, but I think it fits in here. Is it right for us to genetically alter the appearance of our children, and would the media determine this in the same way that fashion is determined. I can see it now. Vogue magazine says that violet eyes are in this season. Too bad for those unfashionable kids with green eyes. That is sooooo 2012Ö tongue.gif

Chew on some of these ideas for a while, and let me know what you think.
Danya
Very interesting points. I just wonder what the fun of having kids would be if you already knew everything about them ahead of time. But that's just me. There are some really wacky people out there.

And the body farm thing, I just don't see it happening until they find a way to have babies without a woman to carry it. I can't imagine any women being willing to carry and deliver a baby and all that entails simply to hand it over to be used for parts somewhere.

It's a lot to think about.
otseng
1. Stem-cells - Lean towards being against it. I do not believe that it's currently possible to just grow a specific type of cell. It's a human cell capable of growing in a complete human being. Also, there are other methods of getting stem-cells besides cloning - umbilical cord blood, bone marrow.

2. Animals - On the fence. The main problem I see with it is genetic variability. It will be increasing the risks of wiping out cloned animals with a common disease. But, it could be useful in keeping endangered species. Then again, as Wertz said, perhaps there's a good reason for a species to become extinct.

3. Humans - Against it.
Rancid Uncle
Cloning in humans isn't the thing to worry about. What worries me is genetically altering people so they are smarter or taller. That is very scary. I feel that cloning can't be that bad as long as people still have certain beliefs about humanity. Many of our beliefs aabout cloning come from movies like Sleeper with Woody Allen ,"Never clone alone".
jjirout
Human cloning. It would certainly add some insight into the nature verse nuture debate, but I highly doubt that another George Bush Jr. is in the making. Clones would be babies first, and what are the chances that a person would encounter that many ineffective teachers a second time around?

I think you all are a little paranoid about this "extinction" issue. Jurassic Park is fiction. It's the "Frankenstein Scenario" all over again.

We have made technological advances, but our computers have not taken over the world.

Would bringing back extinct species threaten our dominance over the planet? You've got to keep in mind that we have major military resources, and consciousness to boot. I understand that the issue may be a little tricky - a little dangerous, but in a c o n t r o l l e d environment (not like Jurassic Park, k?) - with government licenses, police patrol etc... Wouldn't it be amazing to see an actually mammoth?

I am not too familiar with how potential diseases may affect us, and this could be serious...

But, other than that, what has got you all in a tithe about bringing back extinct species?

jjirout
kimpossible
Cyan, I just thought of another possibility. What if GWB did clone himself, and his clone child was trained from childhood to be like Bush? Does that make sense? Someone being raised KNOWING this is how they are going to grow up. Its terrifing. It makes me think of the Japanese who were kidnapped in the 70s and the Koreans that were trained to be like them to replace them in Japanese society.

Im not sure where I stand on cloning humans, and Ive never put much thought into cloning animals or stem cells. Maybe I will do some research and let you all know about it.
Cyan
QUOTE(jjirout @ Dec 2 2002, 06:16 PM)
But, other than that, what has got you all in a tithe about bringing back extinct species?

I think the main issue with that is making sure that there is enough genetic variation within the species and also making sure that the current environment is capable of sustaining those species. They went extinct for a reason. If we don't take into consideration the reasons that they went extinct in the first place, than we may be introducing them into an environment in which they will be doomed to fail.
jjirout
But Cyan, is the intention to populate the earth with the species or merely a zoo here and there?

I guess there are two issues here - endangered species and extinct species. I am referring to extinct species brought back as a remnant from history and kept in zoos and the like.

Naturally, they would get out and ...

With endangered species, hm...

jjirout
Cyan
QUOTE(jjirout @ Dec 3 2002, 08:28 AM)
But Cyan, is the intention to populate the earth with the species or merely a zoo here and there?

I guess there are two issues here - endangered species and extinct species.  I am referring to extinct species brought back as a remnant from history and kept in zoos and the like.

Naturally, they would get out and ...

With endangered species, hm...

jjirout

I'm talking about re-populating endangered species, but we can certainly discuss bringing back extinct ones. I need to think about this a little bit, so I'll get back to you.

As far as zoos are concerned, I have very mixed feelings about them, but that's for another thread. I'll just say that I don't approve of bringing back extinct species just to keep them cages so that people can gawk at them. There has to be a higher purpose than that.
Kisov
I think we should only use cloning to bring back endangered species that are endangered because of human meddling. . .I think we have an obligation to give them another chance, being as it is our fault. But other species that are endangered due to their own inability to produce enough viable offspring, I don't feel that we are under any obligation to use our technology to save a species that was destined for failure from the start.

-Kisov
Cyan
QUOTE(Kisov @ Dec 3 2002, 02:35 PM)
I think we should only use cloning to bring back endangered species that are endangered because of human meddling. . .

I read back through my past posts, and I did discuss extinct species in conjunction with endangered species. I apologize for the confusion there. I'm mostly referring to those animals that are endangered or have recently gone extinct. Nature adapts over time, and to introduce a long gone species into a new environment could create a lot of problems.

I tend to agree with Kisov that humans should use cloning to repair human mistakes, but they should not touch animals that died out on their own.
jjirout
QUOTE(cyan @ Dec 3 2002, 04:05 PM)
As far as zoos are concerned, I have very mixed feelings about them, but that's for another thread. I'll just say that I don't approve of bringing back extinct species just to keep them cages so that people can gawk at them. There has to be a higher purpose than that.

We place animals in cages and zoos. Why would it be unconscienable to do it to a long extinct species?

This may be off topic, but If we could bring back the mammoth , then wouldn't that almost-human-apelike species be far behind? The potential here for better understanding our origins and evolution is immense. I happen to favor the side of discovery, but there are moral issues to consider. ...

jjirout
Cyan
QUOTE
We place animals in cages and zoos.  Why would it be unconscienable to do it to a long extinct species?


As I said, I have mixed feelings on zoos. On one hand, I think they can be very educational, and I value the work that some zoos do in relation to wildlife conservation, but I know there are many nasty, horrible zoos that don't take proper care of their animals, and their primary function is for human entertainment. This is where I run into a moral dilemma.

Cloning a long extinct species would be of great value to the scientific community, but I just don't know if it would be ethical. We couldn't release it into the wild, because of its origins, and it would be forced to live in a confined space for its entire life, probably in a showcase like a zoo. Scientists would gain greater knowledge, but is it fair to the animal, and would we even be able to properly care for it? I just don't know where I stand on this. I'm in a quandary.
Juber3
CLONING SHOULD BE WRONG! in the begining god created the heaven and the earth not MAN
jjirout
QUOTE(juber3 @ Dec 4 2002, 09:32 AM)
CLONING SHOULD BE WRONG! in the begining god created the heaven and the earth not MAN

Is Juber3 being sarcastic? jjirout
otseng
QUOTE(cyan @ Dec 3 2002, 06:11 PM)
Cloning a long extinct species would be of great value to the scientific community, but I just don't know if it would be ethical.

Is it even scientifically possible to clone a long extinct species? I haven't done any research on this, but would be interested in seeing evidence that this is possible.
Cyan
QUOTE(otseng @ Dec 4 2002, 08:24 AM)
Is it even scientifically possible to clone a long extinct species?  I haven't done any research on this, but would be interested in seeing evidence that this is possible.

Otseng, that's a good question. From what I've been reading, the cells need to be alive, but through advances in technology, I'm sure that it will be a possibility in the future. I will see what I can find.
Cyan
Here's an article regarding the cloning of long extinct species:

Cloning to revive extinct species
otseng
It also seems like you'll need to get a live egg from a similar animal that you're trying to clone. So, with the extinct Tasmanian Tiger, it won't be too hard. However, trying to clone a Velociraptor might prove impossible.
Cyan
Here's another article that I found that specifically discusses the cloning of dinosaurs and the problems that scientists will face in their efforts to accomplish this.

Cloning Extinct Animals II
Mega Gigan
Wait... Juber, how is it wrong? Don't we already create life? I mean cloning is just another way of making a human. If you have that mentality it would seem to me that having sex and giving birth is also wrong.
Kisov
I heard on the radio news today that the first cloned human was born yesterday. . .they named her (ironically) Eve. She is a clone of her mother. They said that there are 5 more cloned buns in the oven, so to speak, two of them are clones of now dead children of the parents. . .I guess they want a second chance. I find that I'm not as weirded out by the cloning of a dead child then a cloning of yourself. . .giving birth to your identical twin is just narcissistic.

-Kisov
Cyan
The concept of cloning a dead child creeps me out. I know that the child would develop with an entirely different personality, but the constant reminder of the child's appearance seems like it would make the grieving process all the more difficult.
Kisov
I guess I didn't think of it that way, good point, cyan. It would probably be very tramatic to be the clone of a dead child, everyone would treat you like you were a ghost and not your own person. . .freaky.

-Kisov
Jaime
QUOTE(Kisov @ Dec 27 2002, 02:14 PM)
I heard on the radio news today that the first cloned human was born yesterday

Indeed she was - here's a Washington Post article with more information: Group Claims Creation of First Human Clone .

While I agree with cyan that cloning dead children is creepy, I think the group funding this project, the Raelians, is also a little creepy. Maybe creepy is not the right word, but they are not definitely normal.

I tried to get to their webpage and to Clonaid's webpage, but I couldn't get in. My guess is they are being swamped with hits today. I found this link from the University of Virginia's website that provides a detailed history of this pro-cloning group.

Perhaps one of you could try:
Raelian Homepage
or
Cloneaid's Homepage

(I hope I'm not railroading this thread. If it starts to get away from a discussion of cloning, I'll move it)
Cyan
I wasn't able to get through to either of those websites, but I will try later this evening. They certainly do come off as being a little abnormal, IMO, and it seems like their ultimate goal of cloning for the purpose of everlasting life may prevent them from proceeding in an ethical manner.
Madtown
I couldn't get through either. I don't believe them. I hope I'm right.

Madtown
Jaime
Update: the Raelian site is now working. What a trip. I don't have the attention span to get through much of it. The Clone-Aid site seemed to be bogus; a search of "Clone-Aid" in google didn't reveal a homepage.
Cyan
Woah...that's all I have to say.
UFO Cults = wacko.gif
Satine
QUOTE(cyan @ Dec 27 2002, 07:21 PM)
The concept of cloning a dead child creeps me out. I know that the child would develop with an entirely different personality, but the constant reminder of the child's appearance seems like it would make the grieving process all the more difficult.

In order to have a better understanding on cloning we need to educate ourselves and stay very objective and open minded regarding what we read or see on TV. Fear is concocted purposely by the media. First we need to understand that the public opinion is manipulated by a small number of people to whom we have given a certain moral authority. The media on the other hand needs to use these people as voices to frighten the public in order to guarantee higher audience ratings and better sales.

Lets' not forget how the public opinion reacted when the first test tube baby "Louise Brown" was about to be born some 24 years ago. Everybody was saying that it is against mother nature to do this and that we will create a monster! Today we are using this technique every day worldwide since the past 24 years!
I think that it is very hypocritical to point our fingers towards the cloning technique saying that it is not natural.
Are all the medication natural???!!! We can all agree that in order to cure ourselves or a member of our family from a virulent disease we will take all measure and all the medication possible without asking ourselves, is this natural?? Thanks to science our lives has been made much more easier (thanks to our cars, wash machine, cell phones etc..etc..) and also less painful.

Science will go further and further no matter what, even if you are against it, it is a fact of live, therefore we shall open ourselves to a better understanding of these new technologies and discoveries and we shall not close the doors to many of us who might need these scientific discoveries (shall it be through cloning or anything else) in order to cure genetic diseases. Who knows we might be the next one in need of the latest scientific breakthrough...
And by behaving like this we shall spread more love and judge less!

Also remember that the Vatican has condemned EVERY new discoveries. Not only did it condemn Copernicus and Galileo when they demonstrated that the Earth is not the center of the Universe but Giordano Bruno was burned at the sake for saying there was life on other planets!!! Where would we all be today if some very ambitious and courageous people wouldn't have stand for there revolutionary discoveries and ideas?? We would probably still walk for 2 hours daily in order to go get some fresh and clean
water...

Who has the right to decide for us which kind of method of reproduction we shall choose???
What about the gay community and lesbian community who wish to have a baby of there own genes, or for those couples who have tries everything possible and still are unable to get pregnant? Or just for these people who suffer from a great lost, imagine yourself as a parent and losing your child. Well the cloning technology will able this same DNA to have another chance to express itself...Who are we to judge this??

We shall also remember that we are talking about a little baby girl that just came into this world, not some weird monster! This perfectly healthy little girl (just like Louise Brown) will be raised with so much love since her parents really wanted this baby. It was a very conscious decision.
How many babies have been born in this world and still are today that have been wanted with such love and consciousness? Many of us were conceived by "accident" myself too!
Let's all mediate on this...

There is so much ignorance and ignorance leads to fear and fear leads to anger. The world has shown so much resistance to any changes. It might be time now to step out of our own comfort and explore the real world, the one that is outside the box! There is so much to see up there...

I am french, I am a Raelian since the past 7 years and it has change my life for the best. We, the Raelian Movement, www.rael.org have been conducting so many actions in order to change many things in this world and myself and some 55000 people in some 90 countries are devoting ourselves to help people around the world.

Science can't be stopped however the level of consciousness on this planet can be raised so that science will be used for the best and it is one of our goals for us Raelians,
as well as many other organization to do so in order for this planet to be a better place to be.

Satine
Cyan
Satine - I agree with the vast majority of your post, which seemed to be directed at me. I just want to clarify that the post that you quoted was discussing the clone of an already dead child. There have to be psychological effects related to this. What are your specific views on this aspect of cloning?
dscvry
It's not spelled "CloneAid" for one, it's Clonaid. Their website, which is working fine, is

www.clonaid.com

It's mostly just a PR front-end. Not much new information. Although, they have an advertisement that says: "Yes to Human Cloning: Eternal Life Thanks to Science." Um, riiiight. On the oppostie side of the page, they have this explanation of their goals:

"Cloning will enable mankind to reach eternal life. The next step, like the Elohim do with their 25,000 years of scientific advance, will be to directly clone an adult person without having to go through the growth process and to transfer memory and personality in this person. Then, we wake up after death in a brand new body just like after a good night sleep!" RaŽl

The Elohim, I am guessing, are the alien race that helped them out. Oddly, the name sounds Jewish. biggrin.gif The Raelians definately mask any outward credibility the company might have had.

My only deal with cloning is, why? Why would you? Why not have a baby -- if not naturally then at least through artificial insemination? I think cloning companies should be concentrating on cloning vital organs that could be used for transplantation.
Satine
Dear Cyan,

In response to your question regarding the psychological effects related to cloning I would have to say that first of all whenever some couples have been trying everything possible for the past 2, 5 or even 10 years to have a child there is very little chances that these children won't be taking care of the most precious way possible.
These children are being totally wanted and they will be loved no questions asked.

Also as parents we are the ones shaping the consciousness and thought process of our kids. If a child is growing up in a family that has racism believes and is teaching it at home it is very likely that this child will have the same believes once an adult.
For a little child growing up and looking like one of it's parent will be totally normal because this child hasn't YET been influenced by all the very conservative and some primitive values of our society as well as some of our religious believes. We the adults are the ones saying NO this is bad etc... and we are the ones that our kids are imitating when growing up since we act as models.

If the world is reacting strangely to these cloned children then yes I believe that there will be direct psychological effect on them, however if the world is accepting them the way they should be accepted, as human beings and not as circus freaks, then these kids won't sense any rejection and fear or any other very primitive behavior which adults can have whenever there is ignorance or a lack of trying to understand the scientific and technological advancement of our humanity, then no there shouldn't be any psychological effects on there identity because true love and acceptance will surround them.

Satine :-)
This is a simplified version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2021 Invision Power Services, Inc.