Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ]{ingnik)
    whhhhhhhhhhhhyyyyyyyy?
    just don't like the idea of it....what's the point??
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Custard)
    What do you mean that gets you? Hmmm....
    Im not trying to say I got run over by a wheelchair.
    Dont think wrong thoughts.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tinykates)
    just don't like the idea of it....what's the point??
    to cure all those heriditary diseases etc?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I think it's ok for organs. Nothing more!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ]{ingnik)
    to cure all those heriditary diseases etc?
    hmm...me no like. what's meant to be is meant to be. don't interfere.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Gimp)
    I think it's ok for organs. Nothing more!
    So if it was possibel to modify a bacteria geneticly in such a way that it would bind greenhouse gasses into other compounds effectively removing the entire problem with global warming and CO2 would you dissaprove of it?

    Say you could remove the genes contributing to the development of cancer, should it be prohibited?

    It is NEVER possible to draw such a strict line. There will always be cases where it is questionable whether to use a technology or not, and in the long run, if the tehcnology is beneicial it will be used since it gives a comperative advantage.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tinykates)
    hmm...me no like. what's meant to be is meant to be. don't interfere.
    So if someone is about to die in a bacteriological disease you should not give antibiotics? Is surgery wrong since it saves the life of someone who would normally die? Who gets to decide what is meant to be and not ? Perhaps cloning is meant to be...
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jonatan)
    So if someone is about to die in a bacteriological disease you should not give antibiotics? Is surgery wrong since it saves the life of someone who would normally die? Who gets to decide what is meant to be and not ? Perhaps cloning is meant to be...
    yes...i thought someone would ask this. cloning is where i draw the line - i agree with other things - eg. transplants where the organs are available, but I just think cloning is a bit much...and it will lead to worse things. i agree with euthanasia though....my views are strange...lol that sounds like i want everyone to die....but i don't. does this make any sense??
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SHANDY)
    Im not trying to say I got run over by a wheelchair.
    Dont think wrong thoughts.
    Never mind, I'll just laugh lol!
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tinykates)
    yes...i thought someone would ask this. cloning is where i draw the line - i agree with other things - eg. transplants where the organs are available, but I just think cloning is a bit much...and it will lead to worse things. i agree with euthanasia though....my views are strange...lol that sounds like i want everyone to die....but i don't. does this make any sense??
    I would say that it is a question of prioritites. If you can chose between being a bit controversial and letting a large number of people suffer because of conservative principles Id say Id be a bit controversial. Of course there are limits to everything. I think it is wrong to clone a person just to use the clone as an organ donor afterwards, but it would certainly be ok to clone the individual organs if possible. As for cloning of people without any other reason than creating a new life I quite honestly do not see whats the big deal. I have inherited half my gene from my mother and half from my father. Would it be so catastrophic if I inherited all of them from one person instead? Of course, I do realise that it would be a bit weird if someone made a thousand coppies of himself, but get real. Do you honestly think there is danger that people would start doing this? I mean. I would not want 1000 mini me to take care of. Couples today use contraceptives because they DO NOT want a million kids. I dont think there is a risk that people would start getting dousins of kids just because you legalise cloning. And realy, identical twins are clones of each otehrs. How scary!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jonatan)
    Do you honestly think there is danger that people would start doing this? I mean. I would not want 1000 mini me to take care of. Couples today use contraceptives because they DO NOT want a million kids. I dont think there is a risk that people would start getting dousins of kids just because you legalise cloning. And realy, identical twins are clones of each otehrs. How scary!
    we shall just have to wait and see. and honestly, yes, i do think there is a large chance that SOME people would do this.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tinykates)
    we shall just have to wait and see. and honestly, yes, i do think there is a large chance that SOME people would do this.
    Well, today there are SOME people who murder their kids cut the m up in pieces and store them in the fridge, but this doesnt mean we do not allow parents to take care of their own kids.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jonatan)
    Well, today there are SOME people who murder their kids cut the m up in pieces and store them in the fridge, but this doesnt mean we do not allow parents to take care of their own kids.
    mmmmmmmm. kiiids...
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jonatan)
    Well, today there are SOME people who murder their kids cut the m up in pieces and store them in the fridge, but this doesnt mean we do not allow parents to take care of their own kids.
    poor analogy
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    i've changed my mind cloning shouldn't be allowed
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tinykates)
    poor analogy
    reason?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    it is natural to have babies. it is not natural to clone.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Gimp)
    it is natural to have babies. it is not natural to clone.
    exactamundo my friend!
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Gimp)
    it is natural to have babies. it is not natural to clone.
    so? why should that inhibit us? surely everything is natural? man learned to have babies (or women did at least) and now man has learnt to clone, what is the difference? and anyway, what does it matter if it is 'unnatural'?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ]{ingnik)
    so? why should that inhibit us? surely everything is natural? man learned to have babies (or women did at least) and now man has learnt to clone, what is the difference? and anyway, what does it matter if it is 'unnatural'?
    i was just saying that to dismiss Jonatan's flawed analogy not as an argument against cloning. i don't particularly strong feelings for or against cloning, but there are probably too many bad people in the world for cloning to ultimately be a positive thing in the world.
 
 
 
Poll
Who is most responsible for your success at university
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.