Thoughts on cloning????

It what the human society thinks about this subject. This is what i think about this subject. Wht is the big fucking deal. Why is so bad to clone humans. The scientists have cloned animals, so than why not human. Please somebody tell me.
 
no, i understand that part. Its the paralell you've drawn between dropping a nuke on london and human cloning that lost me.


btw - "science" hasn't dropped a bomb on anyone.
 
ya, we've basically been mucking around with plant & animal genetics since we stopped hunting and gathering.
 
Hello,

Can you tell me something more about Human Cloning . Is it directly from the any single human cell ?
 
Cloning?
I like it. Hell sign me up for a couple. I'll keep one frozen or something hopefully they will figure out haw to do a brain transplant soon.
The other? I would raise as my son!!
Just to see how I would have turned out if I had been raised correctly.

On to stranger questions. Could we raise savage clones for sport hunting purposes? The aren't really real people right? So what would be the big deal? And think of military effectiveness! know you can train soldiers to kill and they can have clones to practice on! Or we start manufacturing building materials out of organics!

Soylent Green!!!
Fashion? Ever wanted a mask made of a real human face?? How about a coat made of human skin? Hair loss tratments using your own hair!!! Cheap labor? sex slaves!( now its not really cheating if it not a real person.) make slaves of yourself!
How about skeet shooting with babies?
(ok, that one might have been a bit over the edge)

Seriously? whats the big deal? Its not like it raises any moral and legal issues or anything.
 
The other? I would raise as my son!!
Click to expand...

I think brother may be better word.:D

Thanks. But all new technologies may have both good & bad points. If we accept new technologies, we can look all posibilities. Nature's imbalancing due to our efforts will have to be compensated only with our efforts only as;

' PROBABLY NATURE MAY BE NOW ANGRY WITH US & MAY NOT HELP TO CORRECT THE CREATED IMBALANCES AS MAY BE ONLY ENTITLED TO CREATE BALANCES OF IMBALANCES BUT NOT TO CORRECT THOSE UNNATURAL IMBALANCES :(

Best wishes.
 
Last edited:
Well..... cloning may be dangerous when misused, dangerous when used properly, dangerous when hidden, dangerous when exposed to much...... everything in the world seem to have too many side effects.....
 
I'd rather it was avoided, due to the great emtions and lack of understanding of it among most people.
 
sugarsandz12 said:
Any thoughts on cloning and how far it should be taken. Do you think cloning is alot further along then we are led to believe? How far off do you see the cloning of humans? Is cloning right? and to what extent should it be done to?

Thanks!!
Click to expand...

What about cloning humans for body parts instead of using someone elses body parts? I mean instead of waiting for someone to give you a liver the docotrs can grow a new healthy one. So I think cloning can be right. :confused:
 
ltcmmdr said:
What about cloning humans for body parts instead of using someone elses body parts? I mean instead of waiting for someone to give you a liver the docotrs can grow a new healthy one. So I think cloning can be right. :confused:
Click to expand...
Unfortunately that doesn't make cloning 'right', it just means that there self-interested reasons for doing it. Agent orange or Thalidomide weren't 'right' just because they were useful.
 
BigBlueHead said:
C'mon Canute, were those things wrong? Or just used wrongly?
Click to expand...
You tell me. It's a matter of opinion. I was just suggesting that innovations that are useful are not necessarily good ones.
 
All right, I'll tell you. There are no right or wrong technologies; they are defined by their usefulness in doing certain things.

A car is good for getting from place to place, but it is terrible for cooking food.
An oven is great for cooking food, but no good for traveling in.

Some technologies, like Thalidomide, turn out to have side effects of much greater magnitude than their intended effect. (Thalidomide was a sleeping pill.)

Others, like Agent Orange, are obviously toxic to many organisms; the US Army used them in close proximity to humans, which shows an obvious disregard for their welfare. It may be that Agent Orange has a valuable use in some context, but its toxic effects on people rule out any use that exposes human beings to it.

This means that the intent and the degree of care of the use of a technology determine whether it is "good" or "bad" in the context of human welfare. The development of technology is tangential at best to intent and degree of care.

I wholeheartedly believe that there should be more and better educated people who examine the intent and degree of care of the use of technologies, but I don't believe that these people should be the same people that develop them, because:

It's not the developer's job to examine intent and degree of care, and they don't have the necessary qualifications, and

That would place too much power in the hands of those who develop technology.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top