humans no body parts yes
there should be a line drawn somewhere
2006-12-10 03:28:46
·
answer #1
·
answered by DR.PHIL-A-LIKE 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
Perhaps you don't REALLY understand what a clone is, it's not something that makes sense to be "for" or "against"; a clone is simply an organism that has identical DNA to another organism, ie the same set of DNA instructions were used by that organism as it "built" itself. Identical twins are, by definition, clones. Do you have a political position on whether identical twins should be allowed? LOL
But to answer you question, i am neither for or against human cloning, because either position might be appropriate based on specific situations.
Would it be wrong to start 'cloning' some ideal person because their DNA was a physically & mentally superior model? Of course, because that simultaneously diminishes the wider 'pool' of genetic material that is necessary for evolution to work effectively.
Would it be wrong to ban the cloning of humans altogether? Of course, because that may be one path to eliminating some nasty diseases. What if cloning/introducing cloned individuals to the gene pool could be used to eliminate Sickle cell disease? Would that be wrong? Of course not...
2006-12-10 03:37:34
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
I have no problems with cloning humans. The end product is an identical twin, which already exists naturally.
2006-12-10 03:40:13
·
answer #3
·
answered by Ivan 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
Identical twins are natural human clones.
I am perfectly fine with them.
However, the cloning of human beings must be approached with extreme care for political, eugenics, moral, evolutionary, and medical reasons.
2006-12-10 04:39:04
·
answer #4
·
answered by Jerry P 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
i am against it because clones do not exist you might look alike but no you are crazy but if god made it then he made clones then
2006-12-10 03:37:11
·
answer #5
·
answered by shawnielb 1
·
0⤊
1⤋
It just isn't natural and isn't what God created.
2006-12-10 03:34:38
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋