Cloning: I'm beginning to side with the religionists

[RollinCalf]

Imagine for a moment that a child has been cloned from her mother. Mother dies when girl is 18. Will (can) father continue to look at daughter who is an exact replica of his wife, only younger, the same way ?

A child is cloned from father. Father abuses mother, leaves and a messy painful divorce follows. Will mother have the same relationship with her son, who is an exact replica of her ex-husband, when he is an adult ?

[rufian]

Re: Cloning: I'm beginning to side with the religionists

Rollin long time. From how I see it, it is not cloning but replicating. Cloning would mean the result would be the same age having all the characteristics and qualities. That mean the wife cannot be the daughter upon cloning.

[RollinCalf]

Re: Cloning: I'm beginning to side with the religionists

Sukuna, you have lost me. By cloning, I mean a process which is intended to produce a duplicate of an existing animal. It has been used to clone a sheep and other mammals. The DNA from an ovum is removed and replaced with the DNA from a cell removed from an adult animal. Then, the fertilized ovum, now called a pre-embryo, is implanted in a womb and allowed to develop into a new animal. The pregnancy that follows, is for all intents and purposes, indistinguishable from any other pregnancy - up until the time of delivery at any rate. The problem I am referring to are some of the psychodynamics involved in the familial relationships that can occur down the line when these babies become adults.

[Fledgist]

Re: Cloning: I'm beginning to side with the religionists

Originally posted by RollinCalf:
[qb]Imagine for a moment that a child has been cloned from her mother. Mother dies when girl is 18. Will (can) father continue to look at daughter who is an exact replica of his wife, only younger, the same way ?

A child is cloned from father. Father abuses mother, leaves and a messy painful divorce follows. Will mother have the same relationship with her son, who is an exact replica of her ex-husband, when he is an adult ?[/qb]

Since the personality is a result of both biological and environmental factors, the clone would not be the same person. And since the clone starts out as a baby, its relationship with its, ahem, guardians is going to be very different from the relationship between two adults.

This being said, I'd probably come down as opposed to cloning human beings -- I'm not opposed in the case of tomatoes -- because it's a pretty stupid way to try to avoid dying (you still die, the clone, after all isn't you) and, if it were to be widely adopted, it would pose a threat to the process of human genetic mixture.

[RollinCalf]

Re: Cloning: I'm beginning to side with the religionists

["the clone, after all isn't you"]

What would make my clone not me ? The fact that there is space between us ?

After all, all those things that go into making up one's physical identity would be the same no ?

By the way, how does it feel to be in bed with religionists ?

On second thought, please don't answer that.

[mountaingal]

Re: Cloning: I'm beginning to side with the religionists

RC, I'm missing your connection between cloning and religionists. Explain, please.

[RollinCalf]

Re: Cloning: I'm beginning to side with the religionists

Did you follow the discussions that preceded George Bush signing into law, a bill that bans human cloning and experimenting on human embryos ?
The religious right occupied front and centre of that stage and Bush caved in.

[mountaingal]

Re: Cloning: I'm beginning to side with the religionists

Okay...are you saying you're beginning to think cloning is bad because it may lead to unnatural relations within families? I don't recall that the religionists took it that far, though I'm not saying you said that.

[Dyoll]

Re: Cloning: I'm beginning to side with the religionists

Originally posted by RollinCalf:
[qb]Imagine for a moment that a child has been cloned from her mother. Mother dies when girl is 18. Will (can) father continue to look at daughter who is an exact replica of his wife, only younger, the same way ?

A child is cloned from father. Father abuses mother, leaves and a messy painful divorce follows. Will mother have the same relationship with her son, who is an exact replica of her ex-husband, when he is an adult ?[/qb]

I fail to see why a father/daughter or mother/son relationship should be altered because daughter/son was cloned, despite exact physical characteristics. They'll get over it eventually.

I find that, the more I think about cloning, I'm less and less opposed to it - therapeutic and reproductive. If we can use embryonic stem cells for research with a view to dealing with certain diseases, and even offering individuals the option of reproducing children through cloning, (provided they can afford it), then it would be fine with me. However, government has a regulatory hand, and it could set the legal boundaries within which the procedure would be done in order to prevent abuse and misuse.

I would hate to think that scientific and medical research is impeded because of certain narrow theological/religious considerations. Of course, I'm aware that it's not only religionists who have concerns about cloning.

[NYer]

Re: Cloning: I'm beginning to side with the religionists

Originally posted by RollinCalf:
[qb]Did you follow the discussions that preceded George Bush signing into law, a bill that bans human cloning and experimenting on human embryos ?
The religious right occupied front and centre of that stage and Bush caved in.[/qb]

I do remember that RC.

Didn't he compromise, kind of, by saying embryos couldn't be grown (via cloning I assume) specifically for experimentation but that "excess" embryos from in vitro fertilization could be used?

He basically said wealthy infertile couples (or those with certain health insurance plans including some for government employees) can make all the embryos they like and discard the "extras", but creating embryos in order to, say, research cures for deadly diseases, is a moral no-no.

An embryo is an embryo, if you believe it's a human person then you should, to be consistent, be opposed to the creation of in vitro "excess" embryos too. I don't think he really made anyone happy with that decision but consistency doesn't seem to be his (or the religious right's) strong suit. (otherwise all those anti-abortion folks would be picketing fertility clinics, no?)

[NYer]

Re: Cloning: I'm beginning to side with the religionists

Whoops, just read up a little and saw what Bush actually did was reinstate a ban on federally funded stem cell research involving embryos.

I still stand by the point about the inconsistency of allowing IVF and not stem cell research involving embryos.

[rebelgirl]

Re: Cloning: I'm beginning to side with the religionists

As far as therapeutic cloning goes I don't have a problem with it. I would rather see humans use human cell material for medical purposes than animals. Personally though I find myself siding (gack, choke) with the religious right (Gag retch) on the reproductive cloning issue. For one thing normal human reproduction seems to be working just fine possible population of 12 billion in the next fifty years. And as I have said before I think the possibilities of it being used as the say nazi used eugenics is very real, and very wrong.

As for doing something to a human embryo. In My view it is a collections of cells, not a sentient being. I think it is much more morally wrong to inject primates with aids for experiments, or grow ears on the backs of rodents, than to grow embryos for research, and medicine.

Lets face it though just about everything humans discover or create can be used for very wrong purposes. Sometimes I think we should be banned from getting out of our beds. think how wonderful the planet would be if humans were all permanently bedridden. I'm sure the animals would appreciate that idea.

[Prince and Princess]

Re: Cloning: I'm beginning to side with the religionists

[JM1]

Re: Cloning: I'm beginning to side with the religionists

"As for doing something to a human embryo. In My view it is a collections of cells, not a sentient being"

Hi Rebel.

Is a child with anencephaly (i.e., born without cerebral hemishperes) a sentient being ?

[Fledgist]

Re: Cloning: I'm beginning to side with the religionists

Originally posted by RollinCalf:
[qb]["the clone, after all isn't you"]

What would make my clone not me ? The fact that there is space between us ?

After all, all those things that go into making up one's physical identity would be the same no ?

{Fledgist: There are millions of human clones right now -- they're called identical twins -- and we have no problem in assuming that even though they are genetically identical, and (in the main)identical upbringings, they are distinct individuals. An induced clone of, say, me, while genetically identical to me would not have the same upbringing and would very clearly develop a different personality.}

By the way, how does it feel to be in bed with religionists ?

On second thought, please don't answer that.[/qb]

Dem always draw weh all a di sheet.