Cloning

[EG]

Do people think its right for pairant to be able to select the DNT that there children have, to make them have blue eyes and blond hair? The fear of the designer baby is becoming an increasingly commen item these days. What about cloning of human organs to cut down the waiting lists for organ transfers? The fear is that a good idea can lead to something more severe such as human cloning. Fortunately the cloning of human embryos are illegal in Great Britain and Japan but it may not always be like this.

Shalimar

[Icy]

I completely disagree with anything to do with Cloning.  It's just unnatural.  It's messing with nature. 

Designer babies is stupid.  If I grew up knowing I was made in some lab, to my parents wants in a child, I'd feel awful.  Why can't parents just love the child they have, naturally?

Gah it's so stupid.  And they cloned animals first...thats wrong.  Everything is tested on animals, it makes me sick.

*ahem*

Anyways, yes, I disagree!

[Nightwing]

Well the UK position is actually pro stem-cell research, which many anti-cloning groups say is just as bad. I'm not sure if it's legal here or not (due to EU restrictions, though I do remember a couple of researchers gaining permisiion to work), but the potential benefits are vast.

There is always the option to do something horrendously evil with every new leap forward in technology. But that should not be allowed to restrict progress that could be so vastly beneficial in the medical arena.

But that's a cloning issue. As far as the main point of the topic goes, and this is mostly a value judgement, I'm personally against it completely. It doesn't unfortunately make for much of an argument though, as it's a moral thing and most people oppose it! On the other hand, should there be the possibility to identify a potential genetic disorder or other major medical worry before birth, that could be corrected, I think the merits of that should be judged on a case by case basis. It's a fine line of course, and one easy to cross.

And anyway, everything has to be tested on something. The general conception of animals before humans in the research field has always been there, and shal probably stay. People object to the experiments on lab rats, yet readily accept medicines and procedures developed thanks to this very research. The alternative, to experiment directly on humans before the animal phases have been completed, would probably not be a suitable alternative...

And then there's this ^_^
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/31102006/140/scientists-grow-artificial-liver.html

[Cuthien, Wolf-maiden]

I'd build a spaceship right off this planet if designing children ever became the norm.  That's so freakish and selfish and unthinkable.  I was not born a perfect child (I looked like a little squint-eyed troll baby) but my parents still love me.  I'm still not a perfect human, and to think that any parent would base their love for their child on the child's looks is scary to think of.  It's rather sick. 

So...what makes us so sure that a cloned organ wouldn't be an equally diseased organ?

[Nightwing]

Methinks the title cloning is perhaps not exactly what the topic address. It's more DNA manipulation to achieve something different.

Or cloning a proven healthy organ and giving to anyone. What fun.
Gattica anybody?

[Icy]

Actually, I am against testing on animals, and I do not have anything to do with Modern medicine if I can help it.  I only use herbal remedies, natural remedies, not tested on nature's only innocent creatures.

Testing should be done on criminals.  The creatures who DO deserve being stuffed with chemicals 

And anyone who agrees with animal testing, has a serious problem.  And it won't be the norm for long, I can assure you.  More and more people everyday realise how wrong it is  

[Nightwing]

That would again be a moral judgement. Millions if not billions have benefitted, and there are far too many things that could happen for which there aren'tany natural remedies. If nothing else, perhaps this would be a viable alternative to animal testing, though both would have to co-exist for a considerable period of time.

Personally I'd probably vote for animal testing over what would effectively amount to torture of criminals. The fact that this is an elitist humanoid superiority point of view does not escape me. On the other hand, I'd also probably say that instead of using paid human volunteers, criminals convicted for relatively serious reasons should be the subject for final-stage testing, but meh.

Unfortunately the people who realise how wrong it is in ever increasing numbers would quickly shift their view should a near and dear one actually need medical treatment based on such research. Not too many have the strength of conviction that some do.

Would you not however support cloning research if in effect it could potentially remove the need to experiment on animals in some future, even if it is a method built upon sacrifices today?

[Icy]

Again, cloning would be fine...if you test it on people.

People who say testing on animals have a flawed argument to begin with.  It's not even NEAR moral.  An innocent animal...why pump them full of chemicals?  Why?  So that us humans can have the benefit?  Ohh yes, thats fair!!

I just hate the human point of view every seems to have these days.  Again with criminals...why not?   If someone has murdered or raped...what good are they to anyone?  Nothing!  They might as well be useful!

[Edge]

Because unfortunately every human being has human rights under law- the sad fact is that rapists, murderers, thieves and paedophiles get special treatment in order to protect them from us rather than the other way round.....

Its my personal view that serious criminals should be incarcerated for life anyway, (Rapists, murderers and of course paedophiles.) so I'd be all for labs testing on them, because they should, by way of justice, sign their lives away the second they commit such barberous crimes.....rather than being let out again in 15 years to offend worse than before because prison life is so messed up.
The images I have in my mind for punishments are best left undescribed.....testing would be a blessing compared to what my mind can cook up. 


It's not likely that any government would ever take such an extreme view seriously though, so realistic thinking should be applied.....logical as it may seem to us, the angered few, every government of a major power do not want to be seen as deviating from the Human Rights Act.....and I can't blame them in this political climate.


Anyway, we digress.....



Personally, I don't mind the idea of cloning organs and such in order to save lives- I think the idea of growing new tissues for patients of serious illness like heart disease, cancers, lung disease, liver failure and such- just think of the amount of pressure it could cut down on medics, the leadtime reduction and compatibility rate would all fly up if we were able to by way of DNA recreate organs for use in medical applications.

Of course, the nasty flipside to this is of course underground medic radicals that could take things too far, creating the so-called 'designer babies' that everyone is so vihemently opposed to.....that's a line I could never agree to cross- All animals are unique- to suddenly change the entire natural process for genetics and giving birth would be to excrete all over nature, and the history of mankind.....what I believe is right, just and necessary is the use of cloned tissue and stem-cells to give those less fortunate souls that were born with genetic defects the chance to live a full, productive and un-alienated life.....not bastardising everything the human race knows about genetics because someone wants the Nobel Prize.....


So in short, I'm against Designer Babies.....I wouldn't mind a clone of myself (Hey, come on now, who else hasn't thought about it? ) I
think stem cells and cloned tissues should be used to further medical science and the quality of life for mankind, while at the same time lessening the Animal Testing across the globe by introducing clone organ testing.

What people must not do however is create human beings, whole human beings and deny them their shot at life- it's a line that must be tread carefully, because this is something that paople may even go to war over in future.....

[Nightwing]

Actually, these days it's more subdued than in the past.
Testing on animals is immoral for you. That's the tricky thing about morals. Many are morally bound to help their fellow man at whatever cost.

Testing cloning on humans has, ironically enougg, far more moral implciations than testing it on animals. I'm not pro-animal suffering. And where possible, care is taken to do things gently (or that's what they say anyway).

Animal testing is a direct result of our evolutionary advantage. If the tables were turned, it's not like I'd be happy to be experimented upon. But that would be what they do for the benefit of their civilisation. It's not a happy debate, just a fact of life. Humans are the dominant species, hence their survival is paramount.

Anyway, I'm not an expert but I'm sure animal testing has as a byproduct unveiled advances in vetenary (sp) science as well. Small solace to be gained from that fact, but it's still something!


...
Edge just read your post, nifty new feature btw, wasn't here back in the day!
Totally agree with the second half of your post.

As fun as it might be to imagine tortutring hardened criminals though, it's not a line of thought I'm comfortable with. Then again I'm pro capital punishment, so whatever.

[Edge]

Replying to Nightwing in a purely off topic manner;
(The funny thing is, I'm against state executions only because of the fact that innocent men and women could possibly be caught up in the crossfire, and because I'm a firm believer in 'life-means-life' being the worst possible punishment; however, that doesn't stop my mind from running wild.  I'm comfortable with it only because I tend to view serious criminals as sub-human, because I hold the human race with less regard than a lot of others would.....the worst offenders, serial killers, rapists, active paedophiles and predators I view as lower than dirt.)

[Icy]

Actually, these days it's more subdued than in the past.
Testing on animals is immoral for you. That's the tricky thing about morals. Many are morally bound to help their fellow man at whatever cost.

Testing cloning on humans has, ironically enougg, far more moral implciations than testing it on animals. I'm not pro-animal suffering. And where possible, care is taken to do things gently (or that's what they say anyway).

Animal testing is a direct result of our evolutionary advantage. If the tables were turned, it's not like I'd be happy to be experimented upon. But that would be what they do for the benefit of their civilisation. It's not a happy debate, just a fact of life. Humans are the dominant species, hence their survival is paramount.

Anyway, I'm not an expert but I'm sure animal testing has as a byproduct unveiled advances in vetenary (sp) science as well. Small solace to be gained from that fact, but it's still something!

As fun as it might be to imagine tortutring hardened criminals though, it's not a line of thought I'm comfortable with. Then again I'm pro capital punishment, so whatever.

Things made for humans should be tested on humans.  Thats that.  And yes, morals are different.  Where you maybe would save a human over an animal, I would be the opposite.  But I am not bound by what species something is.  We are all equal on this earth, whether human, or cat, or dog, or spider.  We all live, breathe, eat, drink, reproduce, etc.  We all have as much right to live as everything else.  Yet humans think they can take this right away, from animals and fellow people.  Which is sickening for me,  To think there are peoplekilling animals this second just for 'medical reseach'  akes me physically sick.  And I do not see how anyone can do it.

And the Human Rights act, is the most annoying thing in this entire world!!  I tell ya, if I became leader of this country, criminals would be very sorry!  Bloody human rights...dont get me started on that:P

Oh and Edge, Im like you, although I believe in execution.  As long as someone is proven guilty, or has admitted it, then I believe in Captal Punishment, in all its glory!  I just think they should have some medical resarch tested on 'em first, least make 'em useful before they eg it.

[Nightwing]

Before they "what" it? What was that picture supposed to represent? :$
Edge, capital punishment is only supposed to be carried out where there is no doubt concerning the guilt of the accused. Where there is any, they should be kept in prison/on parole until there is a final decision made. What about wasting a persons entire life behind bars when they could have been potentially innocent? Released after 70 years of imprisonment is I'm sure not that much better than an execution, should the time elapsed have resulted in the demise of everyone you knew...

We are not all equal in this world. It's not even a division of the have and the have-nots sort. Many would like to say that we are equal, but by no measure is a snail equal to a dog is equal to a person. And in the same way, there is no way a person miles below the poverty line in an African country is equal to a person on it in the West is equal to the ultra-rich. And there are millions, if not billions of each of those categories. Yes we're all equal in that we sleep and eat and breathe etc etc etc. But that has probably not been the defining characteristic of anything for milennia now.

Anyway, we'll just have to agree to disagree :p I find the thought of alleviating human suffering while minimising the cost to the animal world an acceptable exchange, and you don't. But back to cloning, as the article states, this may not actually be a point of contention in the future.

[Icy]

We are all equal, as in each life is precious and each life has a right to live.  To kill for food is natural, to kill to eat to survive, but not to kill to make humans live even longer than they do now.  The average life expectancy years and years ago was about 30/40....now people live to over 100!  It's unnatural.   And poor animals died to make that so.

Each animal has the exact same amount of soul.  Ok, humans may be 'smarter' than other animals (Although I fail to have seen that yet...) but a snail, and a dog, has the same right as any person to live. 

And I dunno what that picture is meant to mean haha!

[Blaen]

As far as animal testing goes I'm for it when the result could be beneficial for humans, for example I read about a strain of mice that were bred to be immune to cancer, but the suffering (If any) that occurs to these animals should be kept to a bare minimum. Testing cosmetics and stuff on animals however is plain wrong. Making animals suffer so middle-aged women can look a few days younger is sickening. I know this is really off subject so yeah cloning... Human cloning happens all the time but international law does not allow the embryionic clones to live beyong a certain number of weeks (Not sure how many exactly). Some doctors have already claimed they've cloned a human which has then been born (Although none of these claims have been verified). Although cloning has it's advantages it has it's share of drawbacks to and if we're not careful we may end up living in a world full of people who look identical. Although come to think of it that's already the case with people emulating celebreties and generally being sheep. As for designer babies I'm not particularly for or against choosing the sex of a child, after all IVF is already meddling with nature and choosing the sex isn't that big a step forward (or perhaps back, maybe sideways...) but anything beyond that I would totally disagree with. If you want a child with blue eyes mate with someone who has blue eyes, same goes for hair colour. And afterall there's always hair dye and coloured contact lenses if you happen to not like your hair or eyes. Hey Michael Jackson decided he wanted to look different and he did it without genetic manipulation, just a really really bad plastic surgeon.

Call to undefined function tportal_version()