Why do you think cloning is bad?

Question

What is your opinion on cloning people? Do you think it would be bad to clone someone?

Answer 1

Cloning isn't all bad but the possibility of it's abuse is what most are concerned about. Cloning to produce viable stem cells is a promising approach for treating patients with many degenerative diseases. At the same time, you get into the whole aspect of whether it is right or wrong to kill an embryo which people in abortion clinics do everyday. I'm trying to be unbiased but I just think it's ironic that women who don't use protection (or if they get raped which is understandable) have a choice to destroy life yet scientists can't even do it because the two are somehow "not-related". This isn't a debate about abortion so please don't respond to what I just said cause I really don't care.

I'm against completely cloning a person (as in they're completely recreated, birthed, and allowed to grow up) because its just not natural. It's freakishly unnatural actually. I don't see any type of gain from cloning another person because I find there is no scientific value in completely cloning another person. There already is a known precedure to do such a thing, but of course no one has ever tried it with a human. I doubt it ever will be tried. It completely removes the natural cycle of human diversity and generations. It's just not right. People talk about creating clones of like Shakespear in the hopes that he would continue to write famous novels. The only way that would happen is if the correct stimuli were to occur exactly as it did to shakespear in order to achieve this. Seeing how it is the year 2006, the possibility of recreating such stimuli is next to impossible. It would basically be a completely different person who just looks like Shakespear. The same with any other clone who is created. You would be creating completely different people who are genetically identical. That doesn't mean their personalities and character traits will be the same. I just don't see the point in it.

Answer 2

Lets say that u are 40 yrs. old . If they clone from the 40 yr old the genetics will produce a Babbie that is 40 yrs old.U talk that it is something great well the little female Geico can clone itself only female. They are also more susceptible to disease and the age problem. The mixing of the male and female genes from non related people produce a better string of people.
U have heard it is wrong to marry relatives that is why ,when it has happened we have had some bad problems.
Yes it is definitely bad to clone things.

Answer 3

The Island replaced into the movie that gave a ideal reason cloning isn't solid for humanity. I dont imagine cloning is solid for this international. Its a lifeform you're growing and by no potential purely is this cloned human being or creature a reproduction of something that already exists and hence motives a conflict in id that is likewise not humane to regulate the clone otherwise because that is a clone

Answer 4

Well, Roman Catholicism and many conservative Christian groups (and I) have opposed human cloning and the cloning of human embryos, believing that a human life begins the moment a human egg becomes fertilized. Other Christian denominations such as the United Church of Christ do not believe a fertilized egg constitutes a living being, but still they oppose the cloning of embryonic cells. The World Council of Churches, representing nearly 400 denominations worldwide, opposed cloning of both human embryos and whole humans in February 2006. The United Methodist Church opposed research and reproductive cloning in May 2000 and again in May 2004.

Libertarian views on the subject suggest that the federal government of the United States does not have the power to regulate cloning, as it is not given any such authority by the US constitution. (Similar to abortion rights.)

At present, the main objection to human cloning is that the cloned individual may be biologically damaged, due to the inherent unreliability of its origin: researchers currently are unable to safely and reliably clone non-human primates.

However, many believe that as cloning research and methods improve, concerns of safety and reliability will no longer be an issue. However, it must be pointed out that this has yet to occur, and may never occur. Rudolph Jaenisch, a professor at Harvard, has pointed out that we have become more efficient at producing clones which are still defective (Development Dynamics. Volume 235, pages 2460-2469. 2006). Other arguments against cloning come from various religious orders (believing cloning violates God's will or the natural order of life), and a general discomfort some have with the idea of "meddling" with the creation and basic function of life. This unease often manifests itself in contemporary novels, movies, and popular culture, as it did with numerous prior scientific discoveries and inventions. Various fictional scenarios portray clones being unhappy, soulless, or unable to integrate into society. Furthermore, clones are often depicted not as unique individuals but as "spare parts," providing organs for the clone's original (or any non-clone that requires replacement organs).

Needless to say, cloning is a poignant and important topic, reflected by its frequent discussion and debate among politicians, scientists, the media, religions, and the general public.

Answer 5

It would be weird with identical likenesses of everybody around...what would happen to twins, triplets, etc.?