Should cloning be allowed?

Answer 1

No. Due to ethics largely and the possiblity of individuals/firms exploiting this if a bill is passed to allow it.

Imagine walking down the street and you see a few of yourself...what would your reaction be? Or imagine what some crazy people would do to the clones they own? Wont the military employ the technology to clone its own army like in Star Wars? And wont waging war on each other become something without feeling as the soldiers are no longer sons of people families, they are just products meant for war.

The consequence will be huge.

Answer 2

Yes. If there are some volunteers willing to be cloned, then I can see no harm in it. In fact, some older people may wish to be cloned so that they have ready-made organ and blood donors. Also, the military could use clones for war; instead of wasting thousands of soldiers, they use the same guy over and over.

Answer 3

Some essentials:

First, cloning does not mean making a person who is a perfect copy of the original. At most, cloning would produce a person that resembles the original as much as an identical twin. There are several studies that are inconclusive on whether twins share the same personality and/or interests/talents. So a "clon" though he or she might look identical to his or her "original" would have a will of his own and most likely a personality of his own, thought probably he or she would share some traits with the "original".

Second, as it has been mentioned before, cloning doesn't mean entering into a machine and walking out with an adult version of yourself. A clone would need either a natural or artificial womb in which to develop for nine months before being "born". After that, he would have to grow up supposedly at the same rate as a normal human (unless because we are talking about a clon, he or she may suffer of progeria or accelerated aging, in which the clon would die before reaching adulthood). If we assume clons wouldn't suffer progeria, then they would live a life of their own which we can assume will be pretty different from that of the "original" from which the clon was "copied". Since environment has a strong effect on development, it is sound to think that the clon would develop a personality of his or her own (although somehow alike to that of the "original").

Third, there is no electric charging involved essentially in the process of cloning. The technique consists of taking the nucleus of an undifferentiated cell and putting it into an egg whose nucleus has been removed.

Fourth, humans are not the only organisms to be cloned. As a matter of fact, many other organisms may have to be cloned before humans just to get the technique into a level where it would be successful with humans.

So, should it be allowed? Perhaps in certain organisms for research purposes. Perhaps just partial cloning in humans, i.e. if we understand the process well enough we would only need to clone a liver from a sick person to transplant it to himself instead of cloning a whole human being (that would need to grow into adulthood) just to force him or her into sacrificing his life to donate organs to the original human from whom he was "copied".

But this of course takes us to ask, just what is permissable in order to extend human life, and how long and why would we want to extend it.

Answer 4

When we step in and start messing around with life itself, we are asking for huge trouble. Basically, it is a violation of the natural life process itself. Look at what happens when you try to redirect a river or stream that has been set in its course for centuries. The river tries to return to its original path, because it was supposed to be that way in the first place. It is the same with life. Cloning is an extreme act of ungratefulness to God, if you want to bring God into the picture, that's simple truth. Cloning treats life as a commodity rather than something of immense value and can only lead to more destruction.

Answer 5

To my opinion, cloning should not be allowed as it might
put human civilization in jeopardy as the scope of its misuse
is as strong as nuclear bombs falling into the hands of
criminals.
Like when nuclear fission was discovered, nuclear scientists had warned of its misuse and also predicted its
peaceful use. With the passage of time we now know the implications of a nuclear explosion more than the benefits of nuclear energy. So, it's better that the chance of danger coming upon the homo sapiens is nipped in the bud.

Answer 6

Nope. Whatever the clones would be used for, they would be people too with their own rights and desires, so I think it's a bad idea.

Answer 7

no i think cloning is wrong everyone should be allowed to be there own person not some else or made into someone else

Answer 8

Sure why not.....

There is nothing we can do to stop it anyway, so we might as well make it legal so we can regulate it.

The bigger question is why are we doing it and what are we going to do with the cloned material?

Answer 9

"Imagine walking down the street and you see a few of yourself..." Cloning isn't just walking into a box and coming out with two of you, it's taking the embrio from a female and electricly charging it and adding protien, or so I thought...

Answer 10

No!!!! Life was created by God and its not up to us to clone what He has made.