Why or why not
2007-03-23 08:13:58 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Elections
It would not affect my vote one way or the other.
Human Cloning is coming; that is an indisputable fact. Buffoonish politicians will not have much affect one way or the other.
While I may view anyone who is especially obsessed about the something that is inevitable, I understand such a new technology could be frightening so I would not immediately reject the person.
2007-03-23 08:18:20 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
You don't define human cloning very well. Do you mean cloning full individual humans or do you mean body parts? I'm not even sure I'd object to complete humans because I am not religious and have no issue with the alleged soul.
My only concern here is whether or not cloning can alleviate suffering. Can a terrible disease be helped or cured by cloning? Then it not only should be done, it must be done. To not do so would be morally wrong.
If a candidate supported dealing with it rationally I would consider that a positive in my evaluation of the person just as I would consider an irrational approach such as religious issue a negative.
2007-03-23 15:26:37 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Here is the deal:
IF you allow cloning, that clone, from the moment it takes its first breath, should be considered an independent life form, with its own rights, as a living, thinking, feeling human being. That is all there is to it. It will have to be raised, just like any other child, and the person who had the clone made would have to accept responsibility for the clone as their child. No corporation would be allowed to own a clone, because that is tantamount to slavery, and thus, is illegal.
2007-03-23 16:25:33 · answer #3 · answered by sjsosullivan 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Nope!!!
It is too early to experiment with things we know, as of yet, Not ENOUGH!
Anyway, if I were to be cloned, I'd jump off the cloning table, for the sake of the planet, and my original self!
I asked my mother 3 years ago, how she would have felt if I had been born triplets.
She was at the table drinking coffee and reading the paper - next thing I know, she'd run over to the sink to spit out the rest of the coffee, that had not landed on the newspaper pages.
Nope . . no cloning yet!
Grace.
2007-03-23 15:33:11 · answer #4 · answered by skydancerwi 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Absolutely not, because there is already one too many of him.
I happen to be against animal cloning also. I think that it is bad science. Genetic diversity is what protects a species from extinction. If a species is infected by a pathogen, most of the individuals could succumb to that pathogen, but genetic diversity could allow some of the individuals within that species to be immune to that pathogen. I don't believe that science should be allowed to do anything that could endanger the entire human species. For what? Just because they can? No way!
2007-03-23 15:17:25 · answer #5 · answered by Crystal Blue Persuasion 5 · 3⤊ 2⤋
Hell no! I'm not Christian and I'm not even that religious... but that is GOD'S JOB.... you can't just go around doing God's job without expecting severe consequences!!! They would have to have a pretty darn good reason as to why they were going to clone people... i.e. saving lives or something for me to even consider it!
2007-03-23 15:17:54 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Sure, it ain't no big thang.
I see nothing wrong with cloning. In fact it could answer a lot of questions but there are those who don't care whether they find out if smoking really kills people or not.
2007-03-23 15:20:59 · answer #7 · answered by Kevin A 6 · 1⤊ 2⤋
No. It goes against my religious beliefs.
2007-03-23 15:29:50 · answer #8 · answered by steddy voter 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Of corse they have been doing this for years in back of closed doors
2007-03-23 15:16:53 · answer #9 · answered by Gypsy Gal 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
no, it's just not right
2007-03-23 15:16:28 · answer #10 · answered by stepfi 2 · 3⤊ 1⤋