JaKiri Posted January 21, 2005 Share Posted January 21, 2005 okay, lets think about this, would god put us on this grass covered earth to have it polluted and the population go up this high!? I THINK NOT!!!! Therefore god doesn't exist. Excellent, we have concordance. i think cloning is disgusting and unappropriate, what would your parents say about this!? i know my parents would be VERY disgusted...so please, put a stop to the research of cloning, its rediculous and un-called for I don't care what my parents say about this kind of thing, because they're not scientists and don't claim to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drug addict Posted January 21, 2005 Share Posted January 21, 2005 i think cloning is disgusting and unappropriate, what would your parents say about this!? i know my parents would be VERY disgusted...so please, put a stop to the research of cloning, its rediculous and un-called for It's more disgusting to not use a technique which could lead to great advances in medicine. Why don't you ask people with, for example, Parkinson's disease or insulin dependent diabetes what there views are? I also agree with JaKiri: the views of my parents on this are irrelevant to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panic Posted January 21, 2005 Share Posted January 21, 2005 everyone says reproductive cloning [of a whole person'] is wrong, but why? whats sooo bad about making a copy of the person, thats what i wanted to know when i started this thread It's like pirating! "Napster Mentality" you would have to pay that person royalties. suppose your new clone goes on to be a super start and make Oprah type money!!! The original person would have the right to sue. on the basis of personal potential earnings. if it was me ... hell yeah i would sue the pants off him "that's what I could have become" besided he was created from a part of me. which is ethically my property. "I am gona go copy right my ars.. incase some one desides to clone me" but in all seriousness, we are not cattle or organ farms.. once life is created our unique and god given right or free will would take over that clone. Unless we can create clones with out brains this would be in my opinion moraly ethically and un-equivically wrong.! imagine how alone one must feel with out a direct father and mother. knowing that you were an experiment. we all have an internal desire for family nucleus as human we need a sence of belonging. how would that be fulfilled! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anonymous Posted January 25, 2005 Share Posted January 25, 2005 I kinda agree with the cloning of animals for food purposes and stuff (not suer what other uses people could come up with) but on the case of humans I think that there vare already to many of us for the world to support. I'm not going against cloning organs just whole people Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted January 25, 2005 Share Posted January 25, 2005 Why would we want to clone [macroscopic] animals for food? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anonymous Posted January 25, 2005 Share Posted January 25, 2005 As stated Food for countries who cannot produce enough Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted January 25, 2005 Share Posted January 25, 2005 Breeding is cheaper and a lot easier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hellbender Posted January 25, 2005 Share Posted January 25, 2005 Remember tinytigey, put down your bible and keep the "sci vs. reli" debates out of this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panic Posted January 25, 2005 Share Posted January 25, 2005 what is the difference between Genetically enhance chicken "perdu" and Clone Chickens as far as feeding the masses i could see cloning as an option, but it would have to stop there. Organs maybe, but humans definitly not! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ecoli Posted January 26, 2005 Share Posted January 26, 2005 Cloning to enhance animals is one thing...When cloning animals they still have to be born. The same way as natural birth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted January 26, 2005 Share Posted January 26, 2005 "Enhance"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aardvark Posted January 26, 2005 Share Posted January 26, 2005 Why would we want to clone [macroscopic'] animals for food? It could be used as a way to enhance the breeding stock. Superior specimens could be cloned and sent to farms. This would be faster than traditional methods of breeding to pass on the desired bloodlines. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ed84c Posted January 26, 2005 Share Posted January 26, 2005 yeh but i would have thought bad traits, may be passed on and on down the chain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted January 26, 2005 Share Posted January 26, 2005 It could be used as a way to enhance the breeding stock. Superior specimens could be cloned and sent to farms. This would be faster than traditional methods of breeding to pass on the desired bloodlines. Don't farmers already do this? As far as I know. they pick the best bullock on the farm and mate it deliberately with the best cow. It's been done for hundreds of years as far as I'm aware. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted January 26, 2005 Share Posted January 26, 2005 It could be used as a way to enhance the breeding stock. Superior specimens could be cloned and sent to farms. This would be faster than traditional methods of breeding to pass on the desired bloodlines. I'm not really sure it would be faster. Consider: Traditional husbandry Bull -> Sperm -> Squirty thing -> Pregnant females Cloning Husbandry Bull -> Sperm -> Horrendously expensive batch processes -> Artificial fertilisation -> Delicate transport procedure -> Implantation of ova in females -> 1 in 1,000 females pregnant with something that will live past a year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deified Posted January 26, 2005 Share Posted January 26, 2005 Besides, when genetic engineering techniques advance far enough, it will be an obsolete method anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cap'n Refsmmat Posted January 26, 2005 Share Posted January 26, 2005 Explain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deified Posted January 26, 2005 Share Posted January 26, 2005 Well selective breeding/cloning is a long slow process. Ultra-effective genetically enhanced cows are a quicker option. Granted we do not have the technology now to make this meat/dairy as healthful/disease-free as I hope it will someday be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ashwini Posted January 27, 2005 Share Posted January 27, 2005 okay, lets think about this, would god put us on this grass covered earth to have it polluted and the population go up this high!? I THINK NOT!!!! i think cloning is disgusting and unappropriate, what would your parents say about this!? i know my parents would be VERY disgusted...so please, put a stop to the research of cloning, its rediculous and un-called for Oh my god!tinytigey u actually dont mean that do u? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aardvark Posted January 28, 2005 Share Posted January 28, 2005 I'm not really sure it would be faster. Consider: Traditional husbandry Bull -> Sperm -> Squirty thing -> Pregnant females Cloning Husbandry Bull -> Sperm -> Horrendously expensive batch processes -> Artificial fertilisation -> Delicate transport procedure -> Implantation of ova in females -> 1 in 1' date='000 females pregnant with something that will live past a year.[/quote'] True, i am making the assumption that cloning technology will continue to advance resulting in off spring that don't prematurely age or are subject to horrible auto immune problems and so on. I don't think it is fair to condemn a technology because it has teething problems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted January 28, 2005 Share Posted January 28, 2005 No, it isn't really fair. But the simple fact is it will always require more steps in the process. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aardvark Posted January 29, 2005 Share Posted January 29, 2005 But the simple fact is it will always require more steps in the process. True, and it probably wouldn't be half as much fun for the bull. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ashwini Posted January 29, 2005 Share Posted January 29, 2005 True, and it probably wouldn't be half as much fun for the bull. well said! but then will anybody care about that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anarchaus Posted March 29, 2005 Share Posted March 29, 2005 everyone says reproductive cloning [of a whole person'] is wrong, but why? whats sooo bad about making a copy of the person, thats what i wanted to know when i started this thread well, lets say that you died, Oh well, Ill just go to the store and get me a new person, no biggie. se what i mean, i takes away your individuality, it makes you replacable, and then it turns people into a comodity, thats why its wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted March 29, 2005 Share Posted March 29, 2005 Firstly, I would dispute that that is necessarily "wrong". You are basing that on preconceived notions without explaining why they are relevant. Secondly, a cloned human is not going to be a convincing replacement for the original, so it's a rather moot point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now