How is cloning wrong or going against creation?

Question

Where in the bible (torah or koran,etc) does it warns of the evils of cloning? Is cloning actually creating life? It's a cell(s) that was copied and grown from a pre-existing organism. So it had already 'been' created-so to speak. I understand how a human being grown in a lab might have all kinds of pschological problems as well as the people who would not develop right physically. But doctors & scientists -right or wrong- have always had their guinea pigs historically. If not humans then what about animals. And is cloning plants also going against nature? I repeat: the organism already exists, so how is it "creating".

Answer 1

I agree with you but many would say that we're playing god by selecting what the will be like rather than just letting it happen. I seriously think that it's fine... I mean... as you said... its just making a copy of genes and growing them into an organism as any other would grow... So basically I believe cloning isn't bad but we shouldn't overdo it... I hope that answers your question... =D

Answer 2

For one thing, there is nothing in the bible that says anything about cloning. The New Testament is about 2000 years old, and the other books about a millenia older. Compared to these ancient scripts, cloning is brand new, the concept having arisen only in the last 50 years or so.

'Going against nature' is a strange argument to use against any new technology. Think about how much of life today goes against nature. Computers don't grow on trees, and it's hardly natural chemistry that goes into making Doritos taste like zesty nacho cheese when there is not a speck of cheese in them (it's some kind of hydrocarbon substrate that gives it the flavour). So, if unnatural = immoral, then there is a lot that our society has to answer for. Much of it is taken for granted. It would seem awfully funny to argue that Doritos are unethical, even though they probably cause a great deal of damage in terms of health and pollution.

Animals have already been cloned, but the process of cloning a complete organism is far from perfect. To get one successful embryo, it takes hundreds of attempts. (Dolly the sheep, back in '96, took something like 230 attempts. Most early cells stopped dividing or did not implant properly.) It is hypothesized that a cloned organism has 'aged DNA', resulting from shortened telomeres, which causes age-related health problems. (basically, the telomere shortens each time a cell divides, and when it runs out, the cells die of old age. A DNA sample from an adult has already used up some of its telomeres, so the clone is old at the beginning.)

Most of the benefits of cloning come from cultures of cloned tissue, which is much easier than a full organism. For example, suppose an organ could be grown in isolation. It would make it possible to perform organ transplants without requiring a donor, by simply taking a sample of a patient's own tissue and growing it into a new heart or whatever. This does not always require an embryo to be used, but it does require stem cells.

Answer 3

First off, religious text like a bible are written for your spiritual guidance. Questions concerning biology, investing or buying a lottery ticket are not gonna be answered in such a text. So forget the "biblical creation" stuff.

Ask yourself is it good for humanity. Cloning of tissue and organs is definitely good. Cloning a whole complete person? Not good.

It's not "creation" in the biblical sense for sure. Creation in the physical sense is the union of contributed DNA from a male and a female, sexual reproduction. That contribution generates a new life. Creation is therefore new life. Not copied life.

Cloning is used in plants a lot. Orchids are difficult to obtain from the wild, some are threatened and protected. Orchids also have a complex reproductive cycle and just cant be grown in captivity all that easily. However, they can and are cloned. The majority of orchids sold in markets today are clones.

Answer 4

The "first cell" originated about 4 billion years ago. Every living thing since then came from that cell.

The cell that each of us is developed from is not our first cell, just a continuation of many previous cells.

If a human being is ever cloned, it doesn't need to be grown to adulthood in a lab. It will still have a "mother" in whose womb it has grown and can be raised as any other person. Just what it is: another person.

Answer 5

If I took a skin cell from you and created another person exactly the same as you how would it not be creating? You don't have a twin and never will but one could be created from you, or even a whole army. The catch is that they will age very badly and be prone to genetic problems and diseases that twins would not. W/out sex and recombination of genes each generation of the human-clone race (instead of evolving and getting stronger) would soon become extinct.