" No Natural problems in Nature" how about when a 5 year old child dies from cancer or another natural population control and the origin farm have you heard of therapeutic cloning one organ witch scientist managed to do with a pig heart and as for playing god this kind of thing has been done for years abortion. we have taken out so Meany now it s time to put some back in of curse with their full rights as a human being life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness as for overpopulation there is plenty of room for farms at the rain forests

'no natural problems in nature' how about when a five year old child dies from canse if you have actualy looked up the subject you will find that there are 2 types of cloning both have worked with alternative animals therapeutic is the one that pervents orgen farms look it up

No but im reading a book about it

But it still wouldnt be right to do so but still i find it tottaly cool

You have a paper to write that should not be written. A professor I had once put a question on the final Exam that implied a fact that was false----I wrote two blue books why that question had no proper answer. As it turned out My answer was the only correct one. Unless you know all the laws of the universe and all the factors that apply in every case---i.e. you have infinite knowledge---you can not with absolute certainty write your paper. I think your professor wants you to take this approach in your paper. If he does not---he does not deserve the right to teach.

WHO makes things right-----does might make right? Does a law make right? Are we talking legal right, religious right, natural right,-------if it were a natural wrong it could not be done. Nature experiments all the time---mutations are natures experiments----some create an individual that is superior others create individuals that are inferior. Superior ones tend to live and reproduce----inferior ones tend to die sooner and fail to reproduce. Sickle cell mutation is a prime example of a bad mutation that has a good potential effect. A person infected has a better chance of surviving sleeping sickness. So cloning mishaps might produce an individual with very superior genes that might bring about
advantages for all mankind. That is unlikely however because most mutations are disasters for the individual and spell doom
to his future offspring. One clone would not be a major problem-----the problem would be an attempt to create a super race of like persons------then a disease could wipe out the entire super race----much like the potatoes in Ireland.

As decreed by the Heaven, the creation of life under the sun is issued from biological cohesion between opposite sexes. Unlike other species, men have not registered submission to the mandate of Nature. Tending to break off grounds has, by and large, abstracted Homo sapiens from the substantial habits. Thus men trifle away the universal doctrine and cloning is the latest technological myth which can be defined as a group of genetically identical cells or organisms developed asexually.
The institution called family is nourished with the saps of affection ; sexual bent in this connection can hardly be connived at. The Hymn of Creation, irrespective of faiths, speaks volumes about tendering submission. But, the virtue of submission is sure to suffer constraint owing to this asexual functioning of fathering.

First, no one has made a human clone. Besides the ethical issues, there are huge scientific hurdles.

Second, one of those hurdles is the inefficiency of cloning. So far, in the BEST case, it takes 300 ova to make a clone. That's a LOT of ova. We can do that for other mammals, but it is very difficult to get 300 human ova.

Third, there are the ethical issues. What's the status of the clone? Is it property? Is it a human with all the rights of humans? It makes no sense for anyone to clone Michael Jordan or Blackwater guards if those clones do not choose to play basketball or serve as mercenaries. It would simply be wasted money. So, for cloning for particular people to do particular things (like play basketball or be mercenaries), clones would have to be declared to be property. How likely is that?

Also if one were to clone the exact DNA from a subject wouldn't that also ruin any chance of being able to fight off infection.

Because you see if one were to clone a human and succeeded then continued to clone humans, what if there was a defect in that one human being that was cloned then that defect would ecxist in all of the clones isn't that true.

I Agree that human cloning is a very bad idea, it can also be argued that not only that it would be a problem because of the identity crisis, but also that we are all unique, imagine that someone would copy your DNA and make a copy of you. scary?

look at my blogg and share your opinions :) http://mytthooughts.tumblr.com/

Ok that sounds nice, but what happens when you die? its not like your gonna come back to life in your cloned body. you will still be dead and your clone will just live as you or something like that. my point is that cloning yourself cant save youre life so whats the point in it.

I agree with you jezzabell.

To speak of clone, one does neither have to be " closed minded fundamentalist", nor a " pragmatist". Clone is an individual that is asexually produced, a technical progeny of a single cell. The quality of life rests little on technicality. To enable an apple-tree beget almond or aloe vera may be technical magic but can hardly serve qualitative purpose of life.

Jezzbell: "I think it's a bad idea. it's not even barly humane. it's just not right. i would rather die than be cloned. the earth is already over-populated, cloning would just add to the probleam."

You are going to die even if cloned. The clone is NOT "you". It's a separate person.

Now, if you were unable to have children, would it be different? Another person with your genes. If you only had one clone, it would not add to the population problem.

Of course, we are assuming cloning is cheap so lots of people can do it and people would do cloning in addition to having kids. But would they? If the clone is your child, it's just as expensive raising the clone as a child. And children are a lot more enjoyable to make.

"As decreed by the Heaven, the creation of life under the sun is issued from biological cohesion between opposite sexes."

How about bacteria and yeast? No sexes. How about those species that are hermaphrodites and fertilize themselves?

Or the species that can reproduce by parthenogenesis? Parthenogenesis is cloning.

It appears that "Heaven" has decreed lots of different ways to reproduce.

"The institution called family is nourished with the saps of affection "

Cloning right now means replacing the nucleus of a female ovum with the nucleus of a cell from the person to be cloned. That new ovum must be gestated inside a female -- a pregnancy -- in order to get a baby. Do you think cloning is done in tanks?

So, if a person who is infertile has a clone and raises that clone as his/her child, what is the harm to a family? Both father and mother would nourish the child with love and affection.

We tell peeple everyone is different and thats a good thing, then why are we cloning people ..that would make us all the same.

Well there are many benefits to cloning human beings like therapeutic cloning which is being able to take a human embryo and a DNA containing cell of a human being, then extracting the stem cells from the embryo and being able to do that would mean that we could create organs from the cells of the person that may need a kidney or a heart. However since no one needs two of the same person running around, they would destroy the embryo before it fully developed of course.

Cloning is also man trying to be god,and give life,BAD IDEA!

Well we are evolving into great science and we learn how do duplicate cells. We thought about if we could do it but we did not think we should!We don't need more than one person with the same personality. What we need is indivdal right and who is to say if a women falls in love with a man, and that women cloned herself she would be in love with the same man. Also the big picture is playing god is wrong!. When you play with fire your going to get burned!

Jenab6,


I agree with you 100%!! I thoroughly enjoy reading your well thought out, intelligent posts. Its a relief to find other like minded logical thinkers on these threads. Keep it up!

There is no such thing as forever. The universe will end one day.

Life extension is the best you can hope for.

1) Cloning a new body and having your central nervous system transplanted into it.

2) Suspended animation is not far away. Jerry Pournelle predicted that either that or cloning would be the next great scientific breakthrough. Go to sleep for a century or two until better medical science exists.

3) Volunteer to crew a starship travelling at relativistic velocity. When you return in a few centuries aging should be curable.

I dont think no one should cloun cause what is the point of it when you only need one of you

Yes! I agree with you both.

Cloning is toying with the fabric of life.

Science has shown that cloning is possible - but there's a booby-trap installed, to prevent tinkering.

DNA degrades as it is used in the cells - it's no longer the complete strands. Perpetual cloning from derivative strands will shorten lifespan each replication. Eventually, the DNA is so degraded as to be unusable for the origination species.

Immortality from cloning isn't possible.

Additionally, recent research has indicated that ordered arrangements of genes is not all that DNA provides. The arrangement of individual genes may change eye color, but the complete strands (in sections, collectively) have charcteristics which aren't yet understood. But, they appear to have more effects than just the individual genes.

We're playing with dynamite. And the fuse is lit...

I agree with you,esp with your last statement, soul body and spirit complete mans' whole being..

and add to that big time criminals can easily get their self cloned and let their clone go to jail..well how would you know if you got the right person suffer..
just sayin...

I dont wanna have a pirated version..

I thin kthat is true but cloning humans is a bad idea because the government can start using the cloning for their own personal game. Then the clones can take over the originals and the world sooner or later and the human race can get extint.

The Holy Spirit within the human cannot be cloned, therefore, you have only created a drone, which would ultimately become a race of slaves. Besides the planet is already overcrowded with "human vermin." What would be the point? Moreover, the clones would develop cancer just like us. Why not spend our scientific endeavers finding a cure for cancer instead of just cloning more "people" that will suffer and die from the desease.

OMG..... SHUT UPPP............. WHY WOULD YOU SAY U DONT BELIVEVE IN GOD SAD....

YOU A TOTALY AWESOME MAN TNX FOR SAYN THAT AND NO IM NOT 5 I MENT TO SPELL STUFF LIKE THAT TO BE FAST

Cloning in my part would do more evil than good.Cloned species could eventually create a rebellion and exterminate the real humans.I think they would do this to rule the world since there is a possibility that they could be way smarter than us.

Then watchout.

Life given by God is only one so if you'll die then proceed to your next journey.Maybe then your next journey is better than what you have in earth,then you are just missing that if you get cloned.

I'm sorry but god doesn't exist for me...If you think about it you must realize that, if he was real and did the kind of stuff that all the religions point for him to do, we wouldn't have poverty, pain, starvation etc. but he doesn't exist SO this happens...Just saying for that!

I must ask, What if it was so you could see someone you loved one more time? Or if it was an artificial body that their mind could be implanted in???? This could save so many people from dying of disastrous things like cancer! And give people who suffer from aids a second chance, like the children BORN with HIV whose parents couldn't prevent it...CLONING COULD BE THE WAY FORWARD!

I advice you to read some last pages in time travel,and fate of universe discussions,then back here and think again with fear.

If cloning is artificial insemination then, would you like to be as if one of a clone? imagine if it was you being a product of cloning process,will you be always using your hearth for your daily life? how will you inter act with humans? (human is the product by love of God)

Sometimes in somebody's life,someone wants to find death, the answer is always a matter of time.
But how if that cloned person don't want to face death,just how long will he/she will clone himself/herself? is cloning like a man daily changing cloths to wear? just how long? how long are the doctor's lives who will do such artificial process?

Somebody may have reason why natural process must have replace by artificial one..
Money matter, but God is love so the the nature is.

You mean like growing your own clone and in case you needed a kidney you would be able to extract your own clones kidney , there was a movie like that ( the whole concept of cloning is not beneficial in any way ) it pervasive frankenstein science working against nature as opposed to working with it

Are you a dumb shit? how the hell could a 20 year old come out of a vagina?

Right on, I completely agree.
I do not understand humans fascination with prolonging life, it's not nature and it's not right.
Mother Earth will bring back balance to this world soon enough. :)

Keep your soul as a whole.
Remember our bodies die, but we live on.

The media may not present things bluntly, but there are hidden messages tucked beneath.
Pieces of media are pieces of people thoughts, opinions, and expressions.
There perspective may not be the same as yours, but that doesn't make it any less creditable.

What you need to do is provide reasons WHY it "wouldn't be right". What are the ethical concerns? What are the ethical barriers?

If you have an infertile couple who wants children, what is the problem with each of them cloning themselves and their raising the boy and girl as their children? We could say that is beneficial because it keeps those alleles in the population and otherwise they would be lost.

"However, in a world that already has or soon will have more people than it can support, cloning makes no sense whatsoever. We just don't need more ways to reproduce humans. We especially don't need a method that is likely to produce more genetically-flawed humans, as cloning probably will since it starts with "aged" genes."

So we should stop reproducing humans with YOUR offspring? Who made you god that you get to decide who gets to reproduce and who doesn't? I can see some special cases where cloning would be the only way a couple could have children. To date, SOME cloned animals have had problems -- notably Dolly the sheep. Others have not. Also, how are you smart enough to know exactly what constitutes a "genetic flaw". The human population may someday need the alleles in the individuals that were cloned but would otherwise have been lost because the married couple were infertile.

"Keep your soul as a whole.
Remember our bodies die, but we live on."

Why would you think the soul would divide with a clone? You think the soul is separate from the body, don't you? Of course you do, because you think the soul lives on after the body dies!

Aren't souls bestowed by God? So, if there is a clone, God gives it a new soul that is only the clone's.

"I do not understand humans fascination with prolonging life, it's not nature and it's not right.
Mother Earth will bring back balance to this world soon enough. :) "

So you never visit the doctor and get antibiotics for an infection? Never had a broken bone set? All of those are "not nature".

There is no "Mother Earth", but yes, if population outstrips resources, then mass starvation occurs and the population drops. We have seen this countless times in other species. There is one famous case of deer on a Canadian island. They increase in population until there are so many they eat all the available vegetation, then in 1 generation the population is cut back (by starvation) to very low levels, then it starts again.

Basically, EVERY species produces more offspring each generation than the environment can sustain. Predation, disease, competition for the environmental resources, etc, all contrive to keep the population relatively stable. Right now human population is increasing because we have used our technology to increase our available resources so that we continue to support the increase. However, note that in some areas of the world starvation and disease still operate to keep the local population of humans constant.

Weaknesses,strength and knowledge of mankind are reason to know God.
Mankind shall clone a human,but for us to create a gene and all of its content out from nothing or even out from dust,no man will ever do.

First, Truth is a statement of existance in its entirety (either static, or the result of cause-effect dynamics). Falsehood is the antithesis of, or absence of, Truth. Truth is reliably consistent, and is supportable through evidence. Falsehood has no such corroborating evidence.

And by its nature, Truth's necessarily comprehensive (i.e. the Boolean AND truth-table). The AND table states that in order for the comprehensive collective to be true, all constituent contributors MUST BE true. Truth, therefore, can leave nothing out, nor include Falsehood. Our human inability (finiteness) interferes with "knowing all", completely - meaning that no one human can comprehend it. Instead, we see a limited view, a Perspective (from a vantage point - a critical concept). What is circumscribed within that Perspective is partial - which can contain both true and false information. It, therefore, is not necessarily truth.

If our perspective has a considerable portion of Truth within its bounds, then we have greater possibility for postulating further extensions of that Perspective. But, those postulations are not necessarily true. We may be missing some vital evidence, which is outside of our Perspective. Our Perceptions (conclusions based upon Perspective evidence) can therefore be flawed. Until verified, our postulation is not true. Likewise, it is not false either, it's just unsupported. If postulation reveals additional Perspective, then it can be relied upon, but only when supported.

Your assigned term inter-relationships are artificially subjective. They is uniquely indicative of your Perceptions, viewed from your Perspective. You've allowed this Perspective-Perception subjectivity to invade your reasoning.

Truth is not dependent upon Life. Quite the opposite. Truth had to exist for Life to be (i.e. the universe developed conditions which encouraged Life initiation and perpetuation).

If one postulates that Life developed without an extra-universal initiation, then Perspective is limited to the universal forms of Life evident. Life (outside human context) knows nothing of Morality. The survival of living organisms is dependent upon intrinsic abilities of organisms to deal with abberations of living conditions (catastrophic or gradual), including competition over food supply. Only with the advent of human beings (whose thinking includes reasoning) does morality stride the stage.

Morality is a value system, discerning between Good and Bad qualities. These qualities prioritize preferences, Good being desireable, and aversion to Bad. This presumes Perspective. If each human being has Perspective which does not coincide with others' views, then there're as many Perspectives as there are human beings. Consequently, all morality would be relative. Who is to say which is the correct Perspective? Are you suggesting a collective morality (which marches toward a supposed absolute morality)? Should everyone not agree with this collective morality, particularly when it's personally disadvantageous (e.g. existance termination), how is this resolved? Only a system which advocates sumpremacy of the collective perpetuation, strictly adhered to by all members, would succeed.

Justice is the execution of Morality cause-effect, in the context of Truth (you get what you deserve, NOT necessarily want you want).

Hi friends
nice post in your forums
please click here more information and this if slove this problem :- http://mevvo.com/

Mevvo.com has a backup plan that fits any home or business. http://mevvo.com Why back up?
============

Cloning....I am all for it...I don't see how it could be anything but benefical....to hell with ethics..The idea of it being possible to create spare body parts is awesome....I don't want a bunch of copies of me running around but if they could make a copy of me, they would also be able to make a copy of the things in me....and a spare heart would save a whole bunch of lives...

NO,IS WRONG !!! According to the morphogenetic field theory of Rupert Sheldrake the DNA who is cloned has already the memory ...so for sure a clone children will learn faster! (because his DNA already did it)