What's your stand on human cloning?

I remembered having a class debate on human cloning back when I was in high school. We watched a movie, The Island, and I don't know if what was depicted could really be possible.

So guys, I'm just curious of what could be your standpoint on this issue.
For me, I'm against it. Simply because of the ethical issues.

For those who agree with human cloning, your opinions will be much appreciated. :smile:

Let me hear it.

Scroll to see replies

Reply 1

Atheism

What ethical issues do you perceive there to be? My general perspective on things would be to allow them if they don't cause harm, and as such the only reason to argue for something is if someone else has argued it causes harm.

Some concerns I've heard:

Un-natural - so what? So's the laptop I'm typing this on.
Don't have the right to create life - surely this would also stop sexual reproduction.
'Creepy' - so what?

And by the way, it's a 'stance' not a 'stand.'

Reply 2

John Stuart Mill

Depends on:
- Their function. (big no to medicine if they suffer)
- If they could suffer.
- Population control.
- Super genetic race empire builders
- General wtfery.
- Two Camerons? Are yo mad bro

(edited 10 years ago)

Reply 3

alexmagpie

I'm not entirely sure what the point of cloning is, assuming we're not doing it for exploitative labour or spare parts. Obviously that's wrong as they would still be sentient beings who have emotions and feel pain. Nobody would agree with implementing it as depicted in The Island because that's barbaric.

I don't have a problem with the process in its own right, but I don't see why we need it, considering we're already overpopulated and people won't stop having children naturally any time soon.

Just no.

Original post by alexmagpie

hypothetical, what about humans cloned that can't feel pain to help out in Africa?

Reply 6

Chlorophile

Original post by dannah.93

Let me hear it.

The Island was chilling. It was an awful film in terms of the plot but it really made you think.

But yes, I'm absolutely against human cloning. I honestly cannot see how you could justify cloning entire humans.

Reply 7

alexmagpie

Original post by John Stuart Mill

hypothetical, what about humans cloned that can't feel pain to help out in Africa?

Whilst it would be a good cause, personally I don't see the difference between a clone and a human born naturally. Clones will still have desires, hopes and dreams, and to deny those to make them fulfill their decided purpose, I'd consider slavery.

Not relevant, but it's also a very bad idea to genetically engineer people to not feel pain. We need pain - people would go blind because they wouldn't realise something was in their eye, or get infections in wounds they didn't notice, walk on broken legs, sustain severe burns because they can't tell something is hot... congenital analgesia is actually super interesting

Reply 8

username474976

Original post by alexmagpie

I'm not entirely sure what the point of cloning is, assuming we're not doing it for exploitative labour or spare parts.

Well, what about cloning geniuses to help advance humanity?

Reply 9

FutureHeartSurg

Original post by dannah.93

Let me hear it.

The benefits of cloning, in my opinion, are also its own pitfalls. Why do we want clones? the planet is over populated as it is, there are issues with food security and global warming and we certainly don't need more people.
People may want clones for : transplants, slaves/ labour-intensive work/ soldiers and so forth. Assuming that the cloning process is fully perfected, the use of clones for any of those things would be wrong. Clones would be still human and, like any other human, should have their lives valued and should be treated like anyone else. They would not be "spare parts" or similar.

Seeing as I cannot think of any way in which human cloning would morally benefit humanity, I am against it.

Reply 10

username474976

Original post by FutureHeartSurg

Seeing as I cannot think of any way in which human cloning would morally benefit humanity, I am against it.

Original post by maskofsanity

Well, what about cloning geniuses to help advance humanity?

...

Reply 11

FutureHeartSurg

Original post by maskofsanity

Well, what about cloning geniuses to help advance humanity?

Advancing humanity at the cost of the clones, though..... Just because they would have the genes of a genius, it doesn't mean that that would display in their phenotype. Even then, their abilities would require large amounts of knowledge for effective use. What we would end up with are schools / camps for clones who have huge amounts of advanced information thrown at them in the hope that one may make a breakthrough. Is that fair on the clones?

(edited 10 years ago)

Reply 12

RedArrow

The world needs more people like me

Reply 13

Maid Marian

100% against it, and always will be.

Reply 14

username474976

Original post by FutureHeartSurg

Let's assume we can clone geniuses so that they are identical to the original and display the same level of genius.

The clones are not a cost - they have a great life, as a genius. Would you rather a) not exist at all or b) exist as a genius at the forefront of human advancement?

They would not need special schools or camps, just as the original geniuses do not need special schools or camps.

Reply 15

alexmagpie

Original post by maskofsanity

Well, what about cloning geniuses to help advance humanity?

I can't see a direct problem with that, as long as the person being cloned is okay with it. However, as far as I'm aware the only form of cloning close to being feasible would result in the clone being born as a baby.

Babies, cloned or not, are not science experiments, and I would want that baby to be born into a normal household with the same rights and freedoms of any other child, not hothoused in some government facility. As we're not sure of the genetic/environmental split with intelligence, the kid might turn out to be only reasonably intelligent, or possibly use his superior intelligence for ill purpose - we can't say. The state should hold absolutely no ownership rights over the clone.

Basically, I don't trust humans, and there are too many variables anyway. But in a perfect world, I can't see a rational objection.

Reply 16

Capn cas

100% for it, and always will be.

Reply 17

TheLoveDoctor

it's all right; some people say it's immoral; how is it immoral when giving birth is moral?

Reply 18

FutureHeartSurg

Original post by maskofsanity

Being " a genius at the forefront of human advancement" is a benefit to humanity, but not necessarily to the clones themselves.

how would you feel, knowing that you were created for such a specific role that you would find very difficult to escape from ? think about all the pressures, all the stress you would unfairly be put under. You may be an exact copy of Einstein, with his same passion and his same knowledge and brain but lets not forget that you could spend years, decades or even another life trying and failing to make a breakthrough. What if the clone wanted to spend some time , or the rest of the clone's life, as an artist ? would that be allowed ?

Creating copies of a species with such complexity, with will as free as it gets and the desire to make our own choices will certainly at one point conflict with the reason for having those clones.

Not to mention, once clones are made for intellectual ability, you can damn well bet they'll be made for all sorts of attributes. Humanity may well find itself competing with a superior clone race, and that's a fight that I could anticipate us losing.

Reply 19

username474976

Original post by alexmagpie

Human rights would be the same, I don't see why they would change.

The only ethical objection I can see is that mistakes will be made when perfecting cloning, but that's not altogether that different from IVF/genetic screening, etc.