ForumsWEPR[NECRO] Should the Cloning of Humans be allowed?

54 6052
shock457
offline
shock457
710 posts
1,405

Another topic I think was weird.

In my opinion, I think it shouldn't be allowed. We are already overpopulated as it is.

  • 54 Replies
rayoflight3
offline
rayoflight3
437 posts
50

Cloned humans should have rights, too! Let them exist!

pangtongshu
offline
pangtongshu
9,995 posts
3,285

no absolutaly not why do u guy sdo thi sit is weird even for a 17 year old like moi


Why must you be so cruel? What did grammar and spelling ever do to you?

Cloning single body parts and organs however should be allowed, sure.


I definitely agree...though you have to watch out for those Conservative Christians/Conservative Republicans..
TheGenovesan
offline
TheGenovesan
65 posts
95

Yes. It should. Cloning is already possible, and can help with solving many issues and sicknesses by allowing scientists to skip the animal testing phase and skip right to the part where they see if it works on us. Safety testing could also be done using this. The only problem, moral decency. There are people who think this wrong, where personally I don't mind too much(don't get me wrong, I still do care, no matter how little). However, it is known that clones live a significantly shorter lifespans, therefore, they are not the same as us and will probably live only a few years.

partydevil
offline
partydevil
5,168 posts
4,560

because their life span is shorter it doesn't make them human?
1st any evidence for this? 2nd how are they not human when they do,feel and look like humans? in the end it is your clone.
if i was a clone and they are going to experiment on my i rather kill myself. it's morally of the hook

HahiHa
offline
HahiHa
6,922 posts
21,160

Cloned humans should have rights, too! Let them exist!

They should have the exact same rights as any other human... if they existed. But we all know there will be issues about them, and I still see no reason why we should even start to clone full humans. So, why should we even start all that potential fuss?

Yes. It should. Cloning is already possible, and can help with solving many issues and sicknesses by allowing scientists to skip the animal testing phase and skip right to the part where they see if it works on us. Safety testing could also be done using this. The only problem, moral decency. There are people who think this wrong, where personally I don't mind too much(don't get me wrong, I still do care, no matter how little). However, it is known that clones live a significantly shorter lifespans, therefore, they are not the same as us and will probably live only a few years.

They're still as much human as you and me, and yes, there will be moral issues. They have feelings too, will be aware of what's happening, and so there are just as much reasons not to use them as guinea pigs than to use your neighbour for that.

If you want to solve the testing issues, then start making propaganda for legalizing testing on volunteers. Still a whole load of moral issues tied to that, but less than your proposition.
Kyouzou
offline
Kyouzou
5,081 posts
3,975

Yes. It should. Cloning is already possible, and can help with solving many issues and sicknesses by allowing scientists to skip the animal testing phase and skip right to the part where they see if it works on us. Safety testing could also be done using this. The only problem, moral decency. There are people who think this wrong, where personally I don't mind too much(don't get me wrong, I still do care, no matter how little). However, it is known that clones live a significantly shorter lifespans, therefore, they are not the same as us and will probably live only a few years.


When's the last time you came across something citing the lifespans of human clones? And regardless of their lifespans, or in fact how little you care, I fail to understand how on earth you're justifying, what is essentially the use of human beings as lab rats.
rayoflight3
offline
rayoflight3
437 posts
50

They should have the exact same rights as any other human... if they existed. But we all know there will be issues about them, and I still see no reason why we should even start to clone full humans. So, why should we even start all that potential fuss?


The same reason why people fuss over the abortions of non-sentient blastocysts!

Oh wait. Uh oh.
HahiHa
offline
HahiHa
6,922 posts
21,160

The same reason why people fuss over the abortions of non-sentient blastocysts!

Err... nope. Abortion has medical implications; it's an operation done for a reason. What good does cloning full humans do?

One thing I just remembered is, if I'm not mistaken, the idea of cloning a Neanderthal, for scientific purpose of course. What do you think? Is it ok or should we not go past the cloning of mammoths? After all we don't know just what a Neanderthal would be aware of etc. Assuming it was possible, naturally.
partydevil
offline
partydevil
5,168 posts
4,560

Abortion has medical implications; it's an operation done for a reason.

in the 1st 9 weeks just medicine does it. this is the time most abortions happen.

One thing I just remembered is, if I'm not mistaken, the idea of cloning a Neanderthal, for scientific purpose of course. What do you think? Is it ok or should we not go past the cloning of mammoths? After all we don't know just what a Neanderthal would be aware of etc. Assuming it was possible, naturally.


i still think it would explorer the world at 1st like a baby. because the brain didn't make any connections yet.
as for cloning a neaderthal i guess it would become a very hairy an ugly retard. because it's brain is smaller then our size.
rayoflight3
offline
rayoflight3
437 posts
50

Err... nope. Abortion has medical implications; it's an operation done for a reason. What good does cloning full humans do?


I think I quoted too much.

I was using the pro-life movement as an analog to cloned rights.

srs
HahiHa
offline
HahiHa
6,922 posts
21,160

I was using the pro-life movement as an analog to cloned rights.

Pro-life movement in abortion debates proclaim the right to life of already existing embryo. That's a difference to human clones that do not exist yet. My point was, even though they should have the right to live if we make one once, why should we even start with that? There's no point to it.

i still think it would explorer the world at 1st like a baby. because the brain didn't make any connections yet.

Like a baby? A clone starts as a baby, it's not a magical device created in adult form. It is grown like any animal, simply that the genetic age is older. But a human clone still has as much a capacity to develop self-awareness etc. as a normal human baby. Would you make medical tests on human babies?

as for cloning a neaderthal i guess it would become a very hairy an ugly retard. because it's brain is smaller then our size.

Chimpanzees have a smaller brain too, yet they can learn to communicate with us using symbols, and have generally astonishing capabilities once trained. I don't think neanderthals would be that stupid.
partydevil
offline
partydevil
5,168 posts
4,560

Like a baby? A clone starts as a baby,


i guess we have a different view on how cloning will be done.

but as you said. there is no use for it at all. so let's just leave it here. =)

Chimpanzees have a smaller brain too, yet they can learn to communicate with us using symbols, and have generally astonishing capabilities once trained. I don't think neanderthals would be that stupid.

retards can also speak, read, play. some retards have astonishing capabilities aswell. like that boy who can count and do math in the octal number system like it's the decimal number system for us.
or the guy that instantly knows what day it is on 06-06-2356 for example. just call any date and he knows what day it was/will be. (leap years included)
both are useless skills but astonishing non the less.
HahiHa
offline
HahiHa
6,922 posts
21,160

both are useless skills but astonishing non the less.

Still the Neanderthals were necessarily self-sufficient compared to a group of mentally impaired people. They were certainly not the brightest people, but I'm sure they'd meet the IQ of some of the more stupid people today

Anyway, we wouldn't know for sure unless we try the experience. I ask again, you think we should be allowed to clone a Neanderthal? You said what it might be like, but not if you'd be ok with it. Moral and ethic issues and such, you know.
Max000_Extreme
offline
Max000_Extreme
113 posts
780

No Never Ever Never Ever

partydevil
offline
partydevil
5,168 posts
4,560

you think we should be allowed to clone a Neanderthal?


i don't see the use of it. except to experiment whit him.
for that reason we shouldn't do it. but if it would happen. i wont care about it that much.

moral/ethic issues will only arise whit what we will do whit him.
Showing 31-45 of 54