Originally posted by ShadowTemplar
And where it doesn't apply common knowledge of how to survive as a tribe it is probably the most hate-filled book on the market.
Hehehehehe...
I especially quite like the parts in the Old Testament where God slays hundreds of people for reasons completely immoral today.
But I guess he's the boss, since he so obviously does not have to follow his own rules of compassion and morals.
Originally posted by Cjais
To the contrary, I sticked to the point. Please be specific where I attacked you ad hominem.
The way you respond to my comments. like the last paragraph in your respond. you made me sound like I'm naive, uptight. like the only way of thinking is your way. shutting my views down. its just the way you act towards the situation. i sense negativity.
Will abortion and condoms ADD to the problem? Why?
i think you missundertood me. when i said "yeah i'm aware with condoms, abortion and sexual preventions and the only thing this will do is add more to the problem."
what i meant is cloning will add to the problem not condoms, abortion, etc.. just got carried away and forgot how to write proper sentences.
Of course I'm not. But even though I don't get it, please be so kind to state where I'm wrong.
thats the thing. you always think you're right. if someone goes beyond your beliefs you automatically turn your shoulder the other way. stop thinking narrow.
It is not. You're placing human life on a piedestal above everything else. I suppose you find the part in the Bible where it says that "Man shall hold dominion over every other forms of life" (paraphrasing) really sound and true. It couldn't possibly be more immoral. The Bible is good wisdom in some places, but this part of it makes me rebuke in disgust.
why do you always have to turn this into a religion issue. once and for all i'm not religous. you making it sound like i'm some sorta die-hard gehova's witness preaching my beliefs which i'm not trying to do. all life forms are precious but comparing the two it just inane. so you're telling me human life and an insects life is the same in terms of value. answer me this. did you ever kill an insect before? thousands of times i bet. did you ever kill a human before? never, you wouldn't even think it (unless you're sick in the head). there just much more at stake when you're refering to a human life. you can't go to jail for killing a bee. like i said before its a whole different concept.
Sorry to bring the Bible up again, but I feel you've got a fair bit of inspiration from it if you regard human life as something different from plants and insects.
again, this is not a religous thing. ok get this straight. i grew up as a catholic. but as i mature and be able to think for myself there are some beliefs i question about my religon so i don't stand by it fully. but i do believe in GOD. its like believing in faith or hope.
Hmmm... since you aknowledge the existance of something "flawless", please be so good as to point out something in nature which is perfect. And no, God doesn't count - we have to sense it for it to count as proof.
here we go again. you keep mentioning GOD and the Bible to my face (thats hitting below the belt). nothing is flawless. you act like cloning is just a simple process which it ain't. there are alot of life at stake during the experimentation, the whole process in general. its much more complex than what you think.
Originally posted by -s/<itzo-
The way you respond to my comments. like the last paragraph in your respond. you made me sound like I'm naive, uptight. like the only way of thinking is your way.
"Orthodoxy is not a way of thinking, it is a way of not thinking." -Orwell
Originally posted by -s/<itzo-
what i meant is cloning will add to the problem not condoms, abortion, etc..
Not therapeutic cloning. You are confusing therapeutic and reproductive.
Originally posted by -s/<itzo-
thats the thing. you always think you're right. if some goes beyond your beliefs you automatically turn your shoulder the other way. stop thinking narrow.
While I cannot speak for C'Jais, I do not belive. Nor do I know. I think. And when I see something that defies logic and rationale or an unfounded prejudice or opinion, I heel against it.
Originally posted by -s/<itzo-
why do you always have to turn this into a religion issue. once and for all i'm not religous.
Aah, but it was you who brought it into the thread:
Originally posted by -s/<itzo-
just leave human creation to GODs hands.
Your words exactly.
Originally posted by -s/<itzo-
you making it sound like i'm some sorta die-hard gehova's witness preaching my beliefs which i'm not trying to do.
No. C'Jais doesn't make you look like a religious fanatic. If you did not make yourself look like one, all he could do was make himself look like a fool.
Originally posted by -s/<itzo-
all life forms are precious but comparing the two it just inane. so you're telling me human life and an insects life is the same in terms of value.
False. He says that a human embryo is as precious as an insect. You have yet to convince me otherwise, or even present some semblance of rational argumentation for it.
Originally posted by -s/<itzo-
again, this is not a religous thing. ok get this straight. i grew up as a catholic. but as i mature and be able to think for myself there are some beliefs i question about my religon so i don't stand by it fully. but i do believe in GOD. its like believing in faith or hope.
But being a declared Catholic does make you religious. And saying that God is against the progress that science makes, this must be "a religious thing" to you.
Originally posted by -s/<itzo-
here we go again. you keep mentioning GOD and the Bible to my face (thats hitting below the belt).
Ooh, but you mention God and the Bible too, no? In the beginning of this thread you tried to justify your opinion with God, no? Well, that's what it looks like.
Originally posted by -s/<itzo-
there are alot of life at stake during the experimentation, the whole process in general.
"Life" is killed every second. And there is no human life at stake in these experiments.
Originally posted by -s/<itzo-
its much more complex than what you think.
I think that C'Jais is a lot more knowledgeable in this field than you, seeing as how you continually fail to distinguish between reproductive and therapeutic cloning.
Originally posted by -s/<itzo-
The way you respond to my comments. like the last paragraph in your respond. you made me sound like I'm naive, uptight. like the only way of thinking is your way.
The part about God being the boss? Or the part about you laying down to die if you're so concerned about life?
i think you missundertood me. when i said "yeah i'm aware with condoms, abortion and sexual preventions and the only thing this will do is add more to the problem."
what i meant is cloning will add to the problem not condoms, abortion, etc.. just got carried away and forgot how to write proper sentences.
Oh, reproductive cloning will certainly add to the problem, you're of course right there, but sexual prevention will take away from the problem.
thats the thing. you always think you're right. if some goes beyond your beliefs you automatically turn your shoulder the other way. stop thinking narrow.
What beliefs? I'm not of a narrow mind, I'm open to new facts. I just haven't seen any so far that point toward there being a higher moral.
why do you always have to turn this into a religion issue. once and for all i'm not religous.
You made it a religious/irrational debate once you introduced unprovable things such as souls, God and whatnot. Believe it or not, you were the one who first started stating that "God makes babies" etc.
did you ever kill an insect before?
If you really want to know - I go out of my way to not kill any insects. I don't swat flies or mosquitoes. I once broke the brake on my bike from trying to avoid a caterpillar on the road.
But of course, I can't make absolutely sure I don't kill any insects/life since that is unavoidable. The thing that bugs me is that you're placing human DNA higher than everything else. It's the "In theory we're better than everyone else" attitude I have trouble accepting.
If it was my pain or life versus that of an animal, I'd place myself higher. I am the all-important character in my life. But I do not view human life as somehow more holy/important than that of animals.
again, this is not a religous thing.
Right, ok, it isn't. But it's still beliefs we're talking about. Whether they're religious or not doesn't matter. You didn't seem to take the Raelians very seriously since they claimed life originated from aliens. I'm doing the same thing here. God/Aliens created life on earth - it's both the exact same hogwash.
Tell me why your beliefs are more important, better, true and wiser than those of the Raelians.
there are alot of life at stake during the experimentation,
Is there? As we all know, cells are alive. But therapeutic cloning does not kill those cells. They're reprogrammed, as Templar said.
its much more complex than what you think.
It may be. But I find your view on these things very simple black and white categorizations. Let's see: We have human life, animal life (lesser life?) and non-life.
Posted by CJAIS
It is very much about your beliefs and morals. You think 2 celled organisms are somehow individual, human life. If people start preaching their beliefs to the wrong people, we end up with a scientific halt on our hands. This is what happened in the dark ages - it was immoral to even assume the Earth was not the all-important center of the universe.
I was keeping my spiritual beliefs out of this debate because I can not speak for God. All I know, is that humans now posess the technology to clone. I can however, speak for my own views on the subject.
BTW, I like Copernicus. I was reading a book "A History of Science: 1543 - 2001" and it mentioned how it was only brought to the Roman Catholic churches attention in a seperate court case unrelated to this relating to a cult that had started up. The Roman Catholic church got it in their heads that because the cult believed in Copernicuses theory the Roman Catholic church targeted Copernicus. I am of course not Roman Catholic and do not attest to their views, so they are not relevent as far as I am concerned. They actually slaughtered ancestors of mine to be honest. So ramble on all you want about what they have done, but don't aim it at me.
Also, the dark ages, science only came to a hult in Europe. The Arabs took off where Europe had left off.
As far as life and cells, I'll just agree to disagree before it turns sour like the rest of the thread. I've known to many of these debates. ;)
Cheers and this thread twas good while it lasted. :)
Thread moved to our flashy new forum :)
Ok, all you guys and ladies keep bringing up the fact of how human cloning will terminate individualism. Well, to me, its a choice. We are WANTING to give up individualism to have this "clone." Its just like joining the military. We are giving up our right as an individual, but no one really opposes that. And the military is just a way of cloning everyone to be a perfect being. I know that there is the fear of getting in the wrong hands, but that like someone said on page 1 goes for almost anything. look back at late 2002 and with John Muhammed Williams and what happened when a gun got into his hands. Does that mean we have to stop making guns because they get into the wrong hands. No, of course it doesn't. People just need to use common sense, because every person born on this planet knows the difference between right and wrong, even though they may not accept it.
Well said Andy.
Technology isn't going to do harm. It's the use of it that might prove to be a dangerous idea. Just as nuclear research yielded both nuclear powerplants and nuclear bombs, so do cloning have both a positive and negative aspect.
Telling people to stop researching electricity because it'll result in fighter jets and humans playing God with light is no good idea. Telling people to stop researching cloning because it'll result in reproductive cloning and genetic engineering on a grand scale isn't wise either, as it can be used for good purposes as well.
And what about artificial insemination? That's artificial by name, yet it is a part of the reproduction of humans. Think of how many sperm donors there are. Are we going to stop artificial insemination because we are selves are playing "GOD" to help a woman get pregnant. Cloning is just another form of artificial insemination if you think about it. Because sperm contain the DNA of the host which is then being passed on to another. You guys REALLY need to think on the other side of the border before saying, " CLONING?! OH MY GOD!! HISS HISS!!" And with cloning of humans comes the idea of cloning humans parts, which will become effective instead of waiting for someone to croak or get into a fatal accident just to donate their organs. What if those same organs were cloned? How will we know how the organs will react unless human clones are produced to see how the cloned organs work and react with natural/uncloned organs/host bodies.
ok not that im religious this is just something i dont get. ok ? when people say god doesnt want this. well first off what did god personally tell you this? i dont think so. so you cant speak for god. second right gods against this huh well then why did god give us the ability to do it. and dont tell me to test are will. thats crap god already knows you have will. if gods all powerful and knowledgeful he would know you have strong will power and convictions therefore religion should in no way halter science. if god really cared for us he wouldnt give us these diseases that the only way to cure at this point would be through theraputic(sp?) cloning. repeat theraputic. not reproductive. so stop with the god is against it thing cuz god isnt you are. thank you have a nice day.:)
Originally posted by ShadowTemplar
Sure... And the US government is hiding aliens in the Nevada deserts... And the Apollo program was just a big fake...
Those are called "conspiracy hypothesises" and usually don't hold.
Well without getting involved in a conversation I don't want to be in I will just say that if nothing has been done...then I just shake my head at scientists.
Though I fail to see how this could be considered a conspiracy.
And I believe the apollo program was a fake:p .........
Cloned humans aren't against the laws of nature. It's not like you're photocopying a person.....a clone will be a totally different people than the clonee.
Not completely different. The same genetic make up, but a different physical appearance, yes. To overlook the potential of theraputic cloning is pure ignorance and utter foolishness. :(
Originally posted by FunClown
Also, the dark ages, science only came to a hult in Europe. The Arabs took off where Europe had left off.
*coughtheGreatLibraryofAlexandriacough*(1)
Well without getting involved in a conversation I don't want to be in I will just say that if nothing has been done...then I just shake my head at scientists.
I see it as a very real possibility that no cloned humans have been born. Why? Because the people who have the expertise to do it have reputations to protect. And current consensus in the scientific community is that reproductive cloning should make you pariah.
BTW: Those "hoax claims" against the Apollo Program pop up from time to time. So far, to my knowledge, NASA has been able to refute them all... But this is kinda off topic.
1) The Great Library of Alexandria was burned to the ground by a Islamic warlord. A litterally irreplaceable compilation of works on math and science (or rather a philosophical proto-science) was burned to ashes to satisfy the religious dogmas of one person.
Originally posted by Darth Groovy
Not completely different. The same genetic make up, but a different physical appearance, yes. To overlook the potential of theraputic cloning is pure ignorance and utter foolishness. :(
Well, different in each way we consider people individuals. Do we not consider identical twins different people?
when they get to human cloning which i think will be in about 50 years would be dangerous
there are some many things that could go wrong and why would you want to have a clone of your self
i wouldnt like it that much
Personally, I don't care if they clone people or not. I'm sure the military would like to try to find someway to use this to their advantage.
"Just send in the clones, they aren't important."
I don't claim to know a lot about the topic but I am trying to read more about it.
Originally posted by Leemu Taos
I don't claim to know a lot about the topic but I am trying to read more about it.
Ahh good idea Leemu :)
Here's a bit to help you on the way: Clones are not subhumans. If anyone seriously still believes this, go on and tell us why. Now, it is just as hard to grow a clone as it is to grow a normal human. In fact, it obviously takes more work because scientists have to fiddle with the process.
Also: Everyone should know the difference between therapeutic cloning and reproductive cloning. If anyone don't know this, read this whole thread.
It should be noted that cloning for miltary purposes would be insane. The cost would be huge, plus, you'd still have to grow and raise them the old fashion way.
It should be noted that cloning for miltary purposes would be insane. The cost would be huge, plus, you'd still have to grow and raise them the old fashion way.
Acutally, in the future, I don't beleive that it would be insane. We as humans can do so much with DNA now (genecticly altering food), that I beleive in the future we will be able to genecticly alter the clones to have accelerated growth. I do worry about that though, and what would happen it the technonogy got into the wrong hands.
I'm personally agaist cloning, but I agree with stem-cell research and what-not.
How would feeding, growing, training a clone be better than simply using robotic weapontry or conscripting "normal" humans?
Plus there are some huge technical hurdles to pass before something like this could be even thinkable. Any one of these are decades away.
1. A way to speed up the aging process from 0 - 18 years.
2. Teaching techniques to educate such speed aged individuals.
3. Artifical Wombs
Since this sort of tech will be not possible for, at least, decades, we really shouldn't worry about it. It's like making regulations for transporters before they actually exist. :)
This is starting to sound like the Genome Project from Metal Gear Series With Big Boss, Liquid and Solid/Solidus Snake. S3 in other words. They used the dna with some altercations to make liquid and solid snake function like combat fighters with focalized training for war and close combat. So, would it be so hard in the next say 50 years to study DNA strands that exceed normal muscle growth and faster foot speed, better reflexes. because all of this deals with our genetic make-up and training. So what would stop the military from doing so? You know they are always looking for new ways to win wars with less casualties.
i am personaly torn on this subject.... on the one hand, people not able to get pregnant could have children and on the other hand, if the technoligi fell into the wrong hands there could be caused a big problem in the world... in cloning itself i think it is okay, but a problem could be that people would look down on people that were cloned as not real humans... that is if they should find out somehow...
Originally posted by SupremePain
if the technoligi fell into the wrong hands there could be caused a big problem in the world...
Right.
Everyone, what exactly is it that you fear if the cloning technology "fell into the wrong hands"?
AOTC'esque clone army scenarios?
lol.... no sorry i should have said... i dident mean like creating a army of clones sorry i meant .......... people cloning and selling human lives on the black market, groving slaves etc. i dont know if you find this a bit exentrick but... i think its definetly a chance considering that some people now adays actuly kidnape human beings and sell there organs to hospitals
Originally posted by SupremePain
people cloning and selling human lives on the black market, groving slaves etc.
I don't think we'll get to the point of growing slaves. Clones have just the same rights as normally bred humans. If someone wanted to sell slaves, he could already do it now. It'd be tough work though, as the slave owner would have to get the clones raised from birth, which would literally take ages. Better to just grab some fresh, mature ones already grown to the right size.
i think its definetly a chance considering that some people now adays actuly kidnape human beings and sell there organs to hospitals
I think that's an urban myth, but I'm not completely sure. I don't think hospitals just accept organs coming in from the streets, and I guess they have to be carefully transported as well. Not to mention that they probably won't as good a prize to make up for all the work.
Ok sorry I'm a little late here :D
I disagree with cloning for all reasons but here is the main one... human males were made with a penis and human females with a vagina for the specific purposes of reproducing. If we take that away then we are losing something very valuble. Even those people who are unable to have a baby because of complications then they can always adopt.
Originally posted by Reborn Outcast
Even those people who are unable to have a baby because of complications then they can always adopt.
yes they can adopt but the child wouldent have there DNA
Originally posted by Reborn Outcast
human males were made with a penis and human females with a vagina for the specific purposes of reproducing. If we take that away then we are losing something very valuble.
No need to worry. I don't think people are going to give up sex any time soon.
And I honestly don't think everybody could/would have their child cloned if the option was there. Think deeper about it: Would you want your child to be a hybrid between your partner and you, or a complete replica of either? I don't think most people are that egoistic when it comes down to it.
I think that's an urban myth, but I'm not completely sure. I don't think hospitals just accept organs coming in from the streets, and I guess they have to be carefully transported as well. Not to mention that they probably won't as good a prize to make up for all the work. [/QUOTE]
i can tell you this: i know a guy that onced was on a tour bus in south amarika they stopped to look at a sight when sudenly one of the people on the tour were missing they called the police and there was a big search after him, the police later found the man in a gutter sleeping they took him to a docter and he discovered a scare on the mans tummy... someone had taken the man , taken his kidney and pitched him back up again.. the docter that ecsamended him saw that it was very professional... the people that had done it definitly knew what they were doing....
you see the people that does these kinds of things are professionals the hospitals just look the other way and dosent ask questions..... and i can tell you they definitly make a lot of money doing something like this, it may even be docters on hospitals doing it, that could explain that they realy know what they are doing and dosent cuase so much damage on the people
and about the other thing i said that it could seam a bit exentrick
to some people... so .....
Originally posted by Andy867
So, would it be so hard in the next say 50 years to study DNA strands that exceed normal muscle growth and faster foot speed, better reflexes. because all of this deals with our genetic make-up and training.
True, but that's not cloning. That's genetic engineering and a different subject. :)
And I honestly don't think everybody could/would have their child cloned if the option was there. Think deeper about it: Would you want your child to be a hybrid between your partner and you, or a complete replica of either? I don't think most people are that egoistic when it comes down to it.
Very true, if they could get the technique down right, they could just combine the parent's DNA and create a new set for the baby (just like the old fashion way).
But then think about it razor, when the right genomes are chosen, they are placed into the selected DNA code strand, because most the of the original DNA has to remain in order to make-up the rest of the genetic material. So most of the person would still be a clone, just enhanced in a sense. And cloning could be considered genetic engineering since the cloned dna wont be 100% exact, its just that, genetic engineering. Anything that deals with alternations or extractions of genetic material, especially that of a clone dna strand, can be categorized as being genetic engineering.
Most of you are missing one critical point throughout this topic. The truth is, we don't NEED cloning! It is quite possible to take stem cells - yes the exact kind needed - from a fully grown human adult. There is no requirement for cloning. (Also, since when does "rational" apply only to atheists? Newton wasn't an atheist, neither was Galileo, daVinci, or many others.) The point is, there is no need for cloning, so why do it when there are other alternatives that don't require taking a human life? Because it is murder, pure and simple. The heart is beating pretty early, and anyone who's ever seen an ultra sound recognizes life - human life - even in a fetus.
Stem cells from where in the adult body?
Originally posted by razorace
Stem cells from where in the adult body? exactly where the hell are stem cells located in adults?
Originally posted by Master_Keralys
Most of you are missing one critical point throughout this topic. The truth is, we don't NEED cloning! It is quite possible to take stem cells - yes the exact kind needed - from a fully grown human adult.
And where would these stem cells reside in a grown adult? But you're right of course, we don't need cloning. We don't need stem cell research to save lives, but it's still a pretty neat idea. Just as we don't really need TV's, medicine, antibiotics etc.
The heart is beating pretty early, and anyone who's ever seen an ultra sound recognizes life - human life - even in a fetus.
The heart is beating pretty early? It's not at all beating when we take the stem cells from the 4 celled embryo and reprogram them to another kind of cell. Y'see, there's no killing involved in stem cell cloning. No cells are going to die. No life will be murdered. Of course, abortion is another matter, but save that for the thread about it.
Originally posted by InsaneSith
exactly where the hell are stem cells located in adults?
Recently discovered actually. Stem cells in adults have been found in a few places, for example, umbilical cords, and bone I believe.
Apparently it's just as, if not more useful than foetal stem cells. Aborted foetuses and cloned embryos are a far more plentiful and reliable source though.
I guess I remember that about the umbilical cord. But, it's a pain to get to ether source. Getting to stuff inside the bone is very painful for the patient. The umbilical cords have to be carefully removed to preserve the stem cells inside the cord. (I think the cells are inside the blood that's in the cord.)
The thing is, it is more convenient to destroy fetuses to harvest the stem cells. And more difficult and painful to get them from anywhere in an adult (the spine is a strong source of stem cells, too). But which do you think most people would prefer, a lot of pain, or a cure for their disease?
As far as convenience goes, is it convenient to raise a child with Down's Syndrome? Is it convenient to raise children at all? Or how about people who aren't working today because they're old - should we just remove them because they're not convenient?
What differentiates us from Hitler if we're willing to sacrifice others for our own convenience? What's changed in the past 50 years? If there is no absolute morality, then there is no right and wrong except what is right for each one of us. If that's the case, what's wrong with the Columbine massacre, or Hitler's genocide, for that matter?
Originally posted by Master_Keralys
What differentiates us from Hitler if we're willing to sacrifice others for our own convenience? What's changed in the past 50 years? If there is no absolute morality, then there is no right and wrong except what is right for each one of us. If that's the case, what's wrong with the Columbine massacre, or Hitler's genocide, for that matter?
There is no right and wrong. Until it's been proved, we'll have to assume there isn't any.
'Thing is, what Hitler did wasn't a benefit to individuals in any way. No good came out of it (none which could make up for the killings).
Actions that hurt individuals and/or society is to be avoided. Anyone can make up their ideals of right and wrong that end up hurting society. This is what Hitler did. And his ideals were no more false than the Jew's or Christian's.
I'm against cloning, come on it's stupid if you think about what happens to the clone, his life will be a nightmare, he'll be living in a test tube, he wont have parents that love him with the same aspect of someone who gave birth to him.
he's going to be a serial killer or comit suicide.
I'm betting he's going to have birth defects and be retarted or somthin.
Originally posted by Master_Keralys
The thing is, it is more convenient to destroy fetuses to harvest the stem cells. And more difficult and painful to get them from anywhere in an adult (the spine is a strong source of stem cells, too). But which do you think most people would prefer, a lot of pain, or a cure for their disease?
Dude, donating stem cells is a voluntary act. We're not stealling fetuses to harvest stem cells. :P Plus, there's a safety issue with getting stem cells from adults that isn't a problem with fetuses.
What differentiates us from Hitler if we're willing to sacrifice others for our own convenience? What's changed in the past 50 years? If there is no absolute morality, then there is no right and wrong except what is right for each one of us. If that's the case, what's wrong with the Columbine massacre, or Hitler's genocide, for that matter?
We do it all the time. If you live in a nonthird world country, you're indirectly useing others for your personal benifit.
Morality is determined by your culture, society, upbringing, religion, etc. There's no evidence of an "absolute" moral code.
It's not voluntary for the fetus.
I'm betting he's going to have birth defects and be retarted or somthin.
But that's the beauty, if you want to call it that. You will know exactly how the dna will be setup. You will be determining everything. Its like picking a computer. You will know exactly how it will look. Its not like you would be buying a Gateway E-Series Tower and get a Compaq Presario or something.
Originally posted by Master_Keralys
It's not voluntary for the fetus.
Does my finger have any say on what it does today? :)
No. But your finger isn't going to turn into an unmistakably human group of cells within the next three weeks, either.
'Cause it's already a bunch of human cells. Duh!
Razor, if we let your finger try to make decisions, no matter how long we wait, it's never gonna develop any further, you could let it sit there for all of eternity, and it would never make a decision, but if you let a fetus develop, it will eventually be able to make decisions.
BUT I think that cloning is wrong in its very essence, unless you can clone organs without endangering or aborting life, or if that is how people choose to reproduce (test tube babies don't seem argued about, though I see nothing wrong with the "old fashioned" way, for any evolutionists, that was the way we evolved ((by the way, I never understood, which came first male or female?)), so why not use that process?) I do see a problem with taking stem cells from developing fetuses though, if you let those cells develop into a human life, then 20 years later you killed it, it would be a criminal offence, but using it to make organs is ok?Another problem is that we haven't perfected it, if it can be perfected, and it took 276 failed attepts to make the first cloned mammal. Do we really want to take that kind of risk for a new novel way of reproducing?By the way, with cloning there is no "sperm connecting with egg", otherwise the genes would come from different parents, it is taken from a cell off of the "parent" and that person is the genetic equal to the clone. Even so, it is still a human life, so I believe that if human cloning is possible, that the clone will be fully human, with a soul and full rights as a human(for those like me who believe that people have souls).Also, a clone takes the same amount of time to develop as a normal child, so why is there a fear of clone armies?
I think you have a point about devaluing human life but I disagree with how it relates to cloning. You first have to be able to clone a whole person before you can expect to be able to clone individual parts for medical purposes. As for failed attempts, they're more likely to simply result in a miscarriage or non-growth than some sort of birth defect mutant. These are all possibilities for normal human reproduction.