I've never heard of a "scientific creationist," but I suspect it's different from a creationist who believes God created the world.
In any event, as a Christian, I'm 100% for using human embryos to grow replacement body parts. We should be helping the humans who are already here rather than worrying about a clump of cells that's not even a human being yet.
2007-11-12 17:38:58
·
answer #1
·
answered by Michael B - Prop. 8 Repealed! 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
No I do not really think it wrong to clone monkeys or any animal for that matter, but it is kinda weird. But yes, I believe it is very wrong to attempt to clone a human as well as to use it for "spare parts" so to speak. Not only are you trying to "play god" by doing this (cloning humans) but also just plain doing something detestable by creating life only to destroy it for "personal benefit". It's a two-fold sin. It is not very wise to try to compare what goes on in animals versus what goes on with research in humans. If you are an evolutionist, then no, it isn't a big deal - because according to them, we're all essentially animals anyway. And that is precisely why the question of cloning even comes up in the first place, because today's society is degrading the "special place" that humans hold in the world.
2007-11-12 13:20:43
·
answer #2
·
answered by Xan 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
I do not rightly know. However, most of the Christan's I know of go and protest cloning and such, claiming it is "against God." However, in their own book it says that the Lord gave us dominion over the Earth and all in it. So we can do whatever we want with the monkeys, etc. And we were cloning for ages, we usually get our plants by cloning, from budding, stemming, gene splicing, or asexual reproduction, it's cloning. So suck eggs there protesters!! BOOYAH!!! lol
2007-11-12 13:18:50
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
as a fashion to clone you prefer a mature (grownup) cellular. while the cloned creature is born, it's going to have an identical elderly DNA as its host (use a 30 year. previous woman's cellular and you gets a woman infant with 30 year. previous DNA). while that infant is 15, she'll incorporate 40 5 year. previous DNA and the 40 5 year. previous subject concerns that incorporate it.
2016-11-11 07:51:06
·
answer #4
·
answered by slayden 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Weird. How much of a body do you need to have a soul? If they cloned just a lung would it have a soul?
Or what about half a body, would the top half have a soul or just the bottom half?
2007-11-12 13:18:07
·
answer #5
·
answered by Daisy Indigo 6
·
2⤊
0⤋
Isn't "scientific creationist" an oxymoron? ¬_¬
At any rate, the world's holy books don't deal with it because the writers had no clue about modern science, and their invisible deity didn't offer them any information because he was too busy sending prophets and killing saviors and smiting the heathens.
2007-11-12 13:18:39
·
answer #6
·
answered by Antique Silver Buttons 5
·
3⤊
0⤋
Sure you can clone your monkey...but don't spank it. Now THAT would be sinful.
2007-11-12 13:26:58
·
answer #7
·
answered by jimbob 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
Whatever else you are, you are a monkey, too.
2007-11-12 16:36:29
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
two monkeys either way would be unnatural. hahaha
2007-11-12 13:16:30
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
0⤋
what exactly is a 'scientific creationist' and is it contagious???
2007-11-12 13:16:02
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
0⤋