World should ban human cloning, except medical: U.N. »
Posted By DiffeeOnline 1 year, 7 months ago in StyleThe world should quickly ban cloning of humans and only allow exceptions for strictly controlled research to help treat diseases such as diabetes or Alzheimer's, a U.N. study said on Sunday.
Read Full Story at today.reuters.com »
320 Views Share Story 27 Comments Report
Submitted By:
DiffeeOnline
Social media, politics, technology, news, marketing, and the environment. These are my passions. These are the things that I spend more time with than anything ...
Other Related Articles:
Why not submit a story?
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentShowing 73 of 77 Comments (view all)
-
-
-
-
0%
tkyrchncs1 year, 7 months ago
Completely alarmist and ridiculous. We should have long been able to clone tissues and complete individuals by now. We cannot stop it from happening by making laws. We should not stop scientific advancement because we currently have no laws in place. Madness. Look at the stupid legal wrangling and the lost opportnunities to produce genetically altered crops in Europe because of this same kind of stupidity. And the crops are coming to Europe anyway. Quit trying to stop something that is going to happen anyway and start figuring out how to make it a (mostly) positive thing. Sheesh.
Reply -
0%
joeblowe1 year, 7 months ago
HEY AS*WIPES! If I want to clone myself, it's NOYFB! Period! And why WOULDN'T clones have normal rights? This is a total non-issue. What happens NOW if a woman carries a child for someone else - you know, a surrogate? The genetic material in her uterus is NOT hers in any respect. Does the baby NOT have equal protection just because of the ORIGIN of it's genetic material? NO! What about a child born with a horrible genetic deformity? Do they not have the same rights as everyone else? (Maybe even MORE?) They do. So why should a person who happened to have genetic material identical to someone else be liable to have their rights taken away? What about identical twins? Triplets? Quadruplets? Etc. They are essentially clones of each other. Are they denied any rights? And, if the cloning process is only used to produce PARTS (e.g. a liver) and NOT a complete human - those parts shouldn't have any more rights than a transplanted organ does now. Again, how is this an issue?
Reply -
0%
reviewer1 year, 7 months ago
I wrote an article on cloning for food, and the main thing that scares me about cloning cattle just to have a larger T-Bone is the loss of genetic diversity in the species. Anyone who raises or breeds animals knows the short and long term health consequences. Say a disease comes naturally or from bio-terrorism but affects some gene lines more than others...if we have a propensity of food cattle with exact genetic makeup ...well, you do the math.
Reply-
0%
joeblowe1 year, 7 months ago
You make a point, but I guess we would PRESUME that the animal to be cloned would be one of the HEALTHIEST ones. I'm not real sure you could make a bio-weapon sufficiently sharp-pointed to only attack ONE particular DNA variant of cattle. If you wanted to target, for example, Black Angus only - MAYBE you could do that - but ONE particular Black Angus? That would be REALLY difficult and not really worth while. If you are a terrorist, why not just knock down ALL cattle? That's even easier. Rather, think about taking a very TASTY Angus and saving the DNA. That way, if the entire heard is wiped out by that theoretical terrorist, you would have material available to rebuild the herd once the danger had passed.
Reply -
0%
tkyrchncs1 year, 7 months ago
The article os about HUMAN cloning. Who has the funds or facilities or REASON to clone large numbers of copies of the same individual?
As to food species, it should be possible to maintain much smaller and greatly more diverse herds by cloning the desirable PARTS of an animal. To all intents and purposes modern herds and flocks ARE cloned. How much genetic diversity do you think there is in a modern egg or fryer producing population, as in comparison to an equal number of wild chickens? This same applies to cattle, pigs, sheep, wheat, rice, etc,etc.
Reply
-
-
-
0%
willottica1 year, 7 months ago
That's the whole point, if we can clone human beings (and thus, create man in our image), what is to separate us from God? What awesome power can God hold when we've taken away creation from him?
Does this mean that God may not have been all important and all powerful?
Many religions are afraid of cloning because of the questions that it will raise, and for religions to succeed, people CANNOT ask the hard questions. Why? Because the religions don't have answers for a lot of them.
Don't get me wrong, I am a practicing Christian, and I believe religions can do a lot of good. But they can also do a lot of harm.
Reply-
0%
1-2-Oscar1 year, 7 months ago
Too many people, from George Bush to George Soros, already act as though they possess divine power (and wisdom). It may be unwise to give them such potent tools with which to achieve their illusions. What would the world be like today, for example, if Adolf Hitler had had such a tool to further his ambitions for a "master race?"
Reply -
0%
tanglang1 year, 7 months ago
Many religions are afraid of cloning and taking God out of the equation because they fear his wrath. They know that the end will come soon after cloning begins.
Reply -
0%
tkyrchncs1 year, 7 months ago
If your religion is suceptible to negation by science, then it its time to join Baal and Zues and Quetzalcuatl has come. Do not ask Galileo to deny that the Earth circles the sun again, please.
Reply
-
-
0%
willottica1 year, 7 months ago
joe, as per the question "why wouldn't clones have normal rights?" The answer I can see would be this:
This clone is me. If I want to mistreat myself, I can. It's mine. If I want to clone myself to have a living 'organ farm', that's my right.
Question: Do clones share fingerprints? There could be major legal issues. Same question for DNA.
Because of the questions about clones, the first clones to grow to adult humans would be subject to a lot of tests, and they could be incredibly valuable to science in that questions of nature vs. nurture could be answered - you'll never get a better control group.
If they're specifically created for experimentation, do they deserve the same rights as natural humans? Is it immoral to create them for experimentation; after all, they have feelings like normal humans; but they would be invaluable to science if they could be used (and abused) as the scientists saw fit.
Reply-
0%
joeblowe1 year, 7 months ago
That is totally absurd. Your clone isn't you, anymore than someone's identical twin is THEM. Regardless of what you may have seen in the movies, you CANNOT simple stick a DNA sample into a machine and have a full grown identical clone pop out. I can't conceive of any circumstance where that could EVER happen. (get back to me in 1000 years - by then, who know?) It would be a baby same as any other - just genetically identical to YOU. As the baby grows it will very, very likely become someone OTHER than you. Probably quite a bit other - and hopefully not QUITE so narcissistic. {;>D)=
Keep it carefully in mind when you are talking about this subject: WE ALREADY HAVE CLONES, and they are called identical twins/triplets/etc. There is NO DIFFERENCE between a natural identical twin and a clone. SAME DNA in either case.
Reply
-
-
-
0%
Dionys1 year, 7 months ago
"why do we have a need to clone people?"
With all the neo-cons breeding like rabbits, who knows. Probably to provide food for aging neocons.
Soylent Green is PEOPLE!
Reply
-
-
0%
philforhumanity1 year, 7 months ago
That's coincidental. I just submitted an article on my blog about concerning the "Reasons For and Against Human Cloning".
Please read if you want to learn more about the moral dilemma:
http://philforhumanity.com/Human_Cloning.html
Reply -
AtheismIsRealityComment removed: User banned.12 Replies
-
0%
slate1 year, 7 months ago
Can I clone myself ten times and make em all work and put the money in my account? No never mind I'd just be creating another underclass that would have more rights than I do and somone the Dems will court for their votes,,,, I wouldn't vote Dem unless they get a better crowd than they have now and I wouldn't want me clones voting for em,,,,,,
Reply -
-
eyesopenComment removed: User banned.
-
0%
willottica1 year, 7 months ago
slate "Can I clone myself ten times and make em all work and put the money in my account?"
Very interesting question, would YOU work for you for nothing? If not, your clone probably wouldn't want to either. But maybe you could teach him to be subservient... how well would you do as subservient?
I think I'd be really disappointed in myself if I didn't tell me to go to hell if I tried to take advantage of me. I'd feel like a failure as a parent/child/creator.
Reply -
0%
deathray1 year, 7 months ago
Why would all the people who are against cloning and against abrogating any iota of US sovereignty to the UN be in favor of this?
It sounds like a contradictory position to take.
Reply -
-
-
braverxromariaComment removed: User banned.
-
braverxromariaComment removed: User banned.
More News
FanHouse
Sahel Kazemi Recently Purchased Gun, Police Tell Relative
Eddie Chambers Destroys Alexander Dimitrenko, Wins by Majority Decision
Tribune Company Finally Reaches Deal To Sell the Cubs
Steve McNair's Tragic End Shouldn't Tarnish His Legacy
Wanderlei Silva on Franklin Loss, Griffin vs. Anderson and Fedor in the UFC
Add a Comment
Sign In With Your Propeller Account
Please keep your comments relevant to this story.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.