The Ethics of Cloning

ravenscape · Dec 14, 2006

In an overcrowded, undernourished world, it's hard to imagine any way for it to be economical to produce people by a cloning process. Cloned tissue and organs for medical treatment/research, yes -- that could make economic sense.

USincognito · Dec 14, 2006

BigToe said:
As for cloning for the purpose of raising organs/tissues/etc to save the life of an already existing individual, I don't really see the problem with it. I think that a lot of technology that develops can be used for good even if taking it further might not be for the species best interest.

I am fully in favor of theraputic cloning especially if we can develop technology that will actually grow working organs (though cloning a being for harvesting them is abhorrent*) if for the most obvious reason - autotransplantation is least likely to cause an immunse system response.

Beings born of cloning should obviously have full human and civil rights, but that doesn't mean I have to like them, nor would them being fully human lessen the creepiness for me. Just because I think they can vote doesn't mean I would want to have dinner with them.

* While I understood their plight, I felt a bit queezy when I read about the parents who conceived a child in order to get a transplantable kidney (IIRC) for their sick daughter. Full cloning for harvesting is a monstrosity.

BigToe · Dec 14, 2006

Oh yes, the idea of cloning a full human and allowing them to develop for however long only to harvest the organs is a horrible idea. It's on par with stealing a kidney for the black market or something. If they're born, then they are born and should be treated as any other human in regards to being allowed to live a normal life. Or as normal as it could be considering they are a clone and the difficulties that might present.

Nightson · Dec 14, 2006

BigToe said:
Oh yes, the idea of cloning a full human and allowing them to develop for however long only to harvest the organs is a horrible idea. It's on par with stealing a kidney for the black market or something. If they're born, then they are born and should be treated as any other human in regards to being allowed to live a normal life. Or as normal as it could be considering they are a clone and the difficulties that might present.

What if you were to clone something but have it not develop any brain beyiond the brain stem and stuff for automating the body? That is to specifically design it before birth so that it would be just a human body.

BigToe · Dec 14, 2006

Nightson said:
What if you were to clone something but have it not develop any brain beyiond the brain stem and stuff for automating the body? That is to specifically design it before birth so that it would be just a human body.

Aren't there instances where that happens naturally? Are we then supposed to treat those with brain damage as potential organ patches to harvest?

USincognito · Dec 14, 2006

Nightson said:
What if you were to clone something but have it not develop any brain beyiond the brain stem and stuff for automating the body?

We already have those, they're called teenagers.

If we ever get to the point where we can manipulate brain development to do that, ostensibly without effecting any other body function (it actually would need a cerebrum too, unless it would be immobile) our level of medical sophistication will have reached a point where colds and cancer were little more than lore and fading memory. I doubt we would need such beings by the time we develop the ability to create them.

chaoschristian · Dec 14, 2006

what makes one process 'natural' and the other not?

it seems to me that the only real difference is that in one set, the act and the outcome are random and in the other set the act and the outcome are determined

do you have some sort of anti-deterministic bias?

USincognito said:
Identical multiple births are the product of a well known and understood natural process. The embryo just splits a few more times before serious baby making gets started. They are also the same age and raised (generally in a similar environment).

yet this can happen 'naturally' and when it does it is usually associated with great praise: 'Oh wow! you look just like granddad when he was your age!'

None of this would be true for clones. If one of my friends were cloned today, and twenty years from now I meet someone who looks almost like he did 10 or 20 years ago I would just creep me out.

USincognito · Dec 14, 2006

chaoschristian said:
what makes one process 'natural' and the other not?

I came up with several analogies when I first read this, but my stuffy nose is distracting me so I can only offer what comes to mind right now

- My hair falling out due to hormones, natural.
- My hair falling out due to chemotherapy, not natural.

- Beer, created by the process of fermentation, natural.
- Liquor, created by the process of distillation, not natural.

One more...
- Blonde hair due to genetics or ultraviolet sunlight, natural.
- Blonde hair due to bleach or Tres Somme, not natural.

chaoschristian said:
it seems to me that the only real difference is that in one set, the act and the outcome are random and in the other set the act and the outcome are determined

do you have some sort of anti-deterministic bias?

I'm talking about a forest fire being started by lightning, and you're talking about an arsonist with a can of gasline, matches and mental problems. If you want to address metaphysics, you'll need to raise the level of conversation higher than comparing clones and identical triplets.

chaoschristian said:
yet this can happen 'naturally' and when it does it is usually associated with great praise: 'Oh wow! you look just like granddad when he was your age!'

None of the people in my anecdote knew my father when he was 33. And I don't imagine any of the people in your hypothetical anecdote saw granddad when he weighed 105 pounds before seeing his grandson who looked like he did back in the day.

And not to be pedantic, but my point about the clones is not that people will observe that they'll look "just like" but that they'll look identical. Haven't you ever seen Highlander, where McCloud greets his septegenerian wife, yet he hasn't aged a day? That's just downright creepy to me.

DailyBlessings · Dec 14, 2006

Hey, if clones are real, why didn't "Dolly" give birth to alligators?

Willtor · Dec 14, 2006

What about grey hair due to stress?

ravenscape · Dec 14, 2006

Willtor said:
What about grey hair due to stress?

I guess it depends on whether teenagers are a natural cause or an unnatural cause

laptoppop · Dec 14, 2006

What about blue hair?

USincognito · Dec 14, 2006

ravenscape said:
I guess it depends on whether teenagers are a natural cause or an unnatural cause

Raven, pop, CC and myself are probably the only ones old enough to remember a popular decoration from the 1970s showing a frazzled housefrau with the caption:

Insanity is hereditary. You get it from your kids.

laptoppop · Dec 14, 2006

Ouch! but true. 50 is knocking on the door this year. YECH.

So if you clone an insane person is the clone insane or do they just get blue hair?

Willtor · Dec 14, 2006

USincognito said:
Raven, pop, CC and myself are probably the only ones old enough to remember a popular decoration from the 1970s showing a frazzled housefrau with the caption:

Insanity is hereditary. You get it from your kids.

Ah, my mom says that all the time. I was wondering where she got that.

USincognito · Dec 14, 2006

laptoppop said:
So if you clone an insane person is the clone insane or do they just get blue hair?

Actually it's the blue hair that makes them insane. Which reminds me we need a place to segregate these freaks of UNnature when the Dr. Frankensteins start making them. Sorta like the old Leper Colonies, but they don't get placed anywhere nice like Molokai. I'm thinking somewhere desolate and unpleasent like Western Greenland or Upstate New York. We can even give it a fancy name like:

Albany Clonatic Asylum and Home for the Criminally Coiffed

chaoschristian · Dec 15, 2006

If you are against cloning, you are against kittens.

As no rational person is against kittens, all people who are against cloning are irrational.

Ipsofacto, all people who are against cloning are incapable of articulating an argument to support their claims or refuting the claims of any person who loves kittens.

I love kittens.

I win the thread!!!11!1!

chaoschristian · Dec 15, 2006

laptoppop said:
Ouch! but true. 50 is knocking on the door this year. YECH.

My brother turns 50 in 2007.

But he looks nothing like me.

He has a Cyberman rather than a Dalek.

kopilo · Dec 15, 2006

Cloning humans seems fairly pointless when there is a perfectly good way to procreate already and it seems to be more fun then playing with petri dishes.

USincognito · Dec 15, 2006

chaoschristian said:
As no rational person is against kittens, all people who are against cloning are irrational.

Kittens, puppies and lambs are cute a priori. Babies can be ugly. I hate to admit that, but they can so what happens if a ugly person choses to manufacture 20 or 30 clones? I would be better if only nature and alcohol allowed them to procreate.

The Ethics of Cloning

Free Crazy Liz

a post by Alan Smithee

You are my itchy sweater.

Take two snuggles and call me in the morning

You are my itchy sweater.

a post by Alan Smithee

Well-Known Member

a post by Alan Smithee

O Christianos Cryptos; Amor Vincit Omnia!

Not just any Willtor... The Mighty Willtor

Free Crazy Liz

Servant of the living God

a post by Alan Smithee

Servant of the living God

Not just any Willtor... The Mighty Willtor

a post by Alan Smithee

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Envisioner

a post by Alan Smithee

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency