For or against cloning humans and why?

Answer 1

I'm for it because as far as I'm concerned it's just another branch of medical science. And what's wrong with "playing God"? We've been doing it for a long time, why stop now? And the clone still has to go through birth anyways. As long as the clones (if we even clone full humans) have the same right as everyone else, why not? I think the real question is are you for genetically altering humans to make them better, and if you do, what is still considered human?

Answer 2

OOHHH... good one - I wrote a 10 page thesis on this one...

No, I DO NOT agree with human cloning...

First of all, they use embryotic stem cells (which can only be provided by fertilized embryos that are 10 to 14 days old)... that's murder, to the fullest.

Second of all, I do not think it's wise for anyone to 'play God' ... creating life that isn't supposed to be here in the first place is in direct difance of the natural order of the universe.

There are two types of cloning - therapuetic and reproductive.
~Therapuetic cloning is when you take a few cells from a defective (say a liver for example) organ, and make a new liver out of stem cells. This kind of cloning still kills embryo's... *and on a topic not strayed from this one... they want to start cloning humans for 'spare parts' ... *talk about taking life for granted. This is wrong - to the fullest... nothing could be more wrong than that.
~Reproductive cloning is when a human has an exact clone of themselves made... *and it's also used as Envitro (ensemination outside the body) fertilization. This type of cloning would take a donor egg (from any female) and they would inject the sponsor's DNA in to it... *poof* human clone.

Now, there are some things that go along with this... legalities out the ***. Would a clone have rights? What would they be? With a clone.. there would be no natural mother or father... what of that?

Cloning is just DANGEROUS ... and the government should put stiffer penalities on people who go 'underground' to practice it... they should also put a stop to stem-cell research... innocent embryo's are being created SOLELY to be destroyed -- how ****ed up is that?

Did you know that they have cloned a mouse, cat, donkey, horse, bird, snake, monkey - and the famous 'Dolly' sheep .. ?

Answer 3

Against. Though I plan on studying science as a career, I believe the "dangerous" thought that in science knowledge comes second to ethics relating to the value of human life. It's like when I was in newspaper class in school and believed that freedom of speech carried the responsibility of respect for others.

Cloning humans is respectful because it makes humanity more than a subject for study but also as a tool for study. Tools are replaceable if they break but people are not.

Understanding that cloning doesn't always mean the sci-fi version, the value of the previous statement does not diminish. There is a need for organ donation but the answer is not in the disrespectful loss of human life that would come with development of cloning for this purpose. It lies in the same thing that prevents this, respect for other people and the willingness to make a sacrifice.

Answer 4

For it.

For therapeutic cloning, most definitely yes. I chose to believe that an embryo below a certain stage of development is not by any stretch of the imagination a person. And thus using embryonic stem cells is not killing a person, because it is just a bunch of cells.

For reproductive cloning, a very reserved yes. I don't think who a person is is define by genetics alone, and cloning just means making another being with the exact same genetic makeup of the original person. Just as identical twins are not the same person, the clone and the original will not be the same person because they will have different life experiences. However, I believe that the process to make clone will be very difficult and be fraught with failures. And I can't justify the likely possibilities of creating humans with major developmental abnormalities just for the advancement of science.

Answer 5

For cloning human organs, because lots of people don't donate, against cloning complete human beings.

Answer 6

Against human cloning because there is still not enough research to determine the morality issues, ethical issues, and humanity issues. I believe most of the human population should be satisfied with their questions before proceeding.

Answer 7

For. There are benefits to cloning. Even if you are against it people are going to press the envelope anyway. People are going to challenge the unknown. With cloning, as with cybernetics, space travel or anything else, It's going to happen anyway. Its better to set guidelines for the testing and application of this science. That way the good guys will be as advanced as the bad guys and will be able to build in fail-safes. If not Dr. Evil will make evil twins of everyone in his secret subterranean lab and take over the world.

Answer 8

Against. It goes against the natural order of creation through birth. We essentially are playing "God" when we make attempts to clone humans.

Answer 9

It doesn't matter... as long as it benefits the human race... and also as long as the human cloned babies will not be criminals like some of the natural human entities.

Answer 10

can you imagine having another you? That would be just too odd. I vote no! Let God handle the population!! The more natural,,the better off we are. I DO however endorse stem cell capture. Thank you