Human Cloning

Post Reply New Topic

What? No. I don't think that I said anything that resembles that statement.
I'm against life because it's not worth living.
I'm quite happy with the fact that we don't live forever...

All I know is that this world can't be fixed, at least not in this generation or the next ones, thus I see no point in living in this place.
I think that deciding to have an offspring of my own would be very hypocritical as I wish I wouldn't have been born, and not worth the risk of him/her living a sad, painful life. If you don't live, you have nothing to lose. If you do, you have too much. And you can't just eliminate your life. At least I mentally can't, as I'm afraid of every suicide option available to me going wrong (when I wanted to kill myself I looked for options), and now I'm declined to the idea of suicide, at least while my family is alive, because it will hurt them.

So I try to live my life as good as I can, but I still think I would be better off without it, and that my parents would be better off without seeing their child in pain, and having only my sisters.
Bottom line, after spending so much time wishing I hadn't been born, I feel like I would betray myself if I reproduce.

And I, after almost 85 years, find life fascinating and replete with all sorts of things worth doing. You are simply unaware.

a cloned human would, by definition, be the same as the original. humans are humans are humans. all rights currently afforded to naturally conceived and naturally born humans are afforded to humans conceived via IFV and also to those, like myself, who were not "naturally born" but were rather "ripped from my mother's womb" via cesarean. why should a cloned human have any fewer rights? unless, of course, you're of the ridiculous mind that human rights are granted by some magical creature who disapproves of asexual reproduction.

as to why anyone should want to clone humans, i suggest that the reasons are many. the argument that people might clone humans for nefarious purposes is valid but seems to ignore the fact that this already happens without cloning. people buy children, or pay women to have them, for the sole purpose of sexual exploitation. this happens now. militaries could clone genetically engineered humans, but real live humans are becoming less and less effective/popular in war, in our own time.

if we find ourselves able to expand beyond this planet before ceding power to an intelligence construct of our own making, cloning could help us increase our numbers at a more off-planet-expansion-appropriate rate.

leaving all of that aside, why should we hold to current reproduction requirements that are imposed by our environment when we have the power to change the requirements imposed by our environment? should everyone still be trying to have as many children as possible to ensure that at least one of them survives to reproduce and pass on our genes? should we restrict solitary minds (like many who frequent this forum) and force them to abstain from reproduction because their natural mutations don't make them appealing to members of the opposite sex?

how many great minds do each of you, regardless of political or religious affiliation, know of who have died or passed the age of virility/fertility without reproducing?

how terrible some people think it would be to use technology to improve the conditions in which we live.

thankfully, those people can often only slow the advances. this is shown in that you're reading this on a machine wherever you are and i'm writing it on a machine while making use of a wonderful thing called "indoor plumbing." i shall presently flush away my excrement and pull up my machine-made pants. i'll thank the anti-cloning (modern) luddites to dig a hole before they crap so that i don't have to smell it, or else concede that plumbing is superior.

While I liked your observation on the purposes of cloning, I won't tolerate offensive comments directed towards theists or any other group.

is this supposed to be a humorous remark?

who would like to step forward and say "i believe that human rights are granted by a magical creature who disapproves of asexual reproduction?"

seriously. you don't have to dig in my comments for insults. my insults are generally quite plain (balls of allah!). asexual reproduction is a rather popular method on earth, so even the most fundamentalist of theists do not believe in such a magical creature.

if your magical creature specifically opposes asexual reproduction of humans, let him say so. i find such a belief to be a sh***y definition of "human rights" and offensive to humanity.

Theists or any other group bear the burden of their absurdities. Pointing out the foolishness of a viewpoint is a service, not an offense.

ruveyn

I am neither opposed nor in favor of cloning. It's like, why does it matter?

Why would you want a clone as a means of reproduction? Aside from the natural way that works all too well, there are so many orphan children in this world that could be adopted. Some inane desire to pass on your genes, which quite frankly aren't anything special, or what?

That argument works against natural reproduction s well.

Thats kinda the point.
The old fashioned way works well enough. And is helluvalot cheaper than making a clone yourself in a lab test tube.

Sure, people should give more consideration to adoption.

Sine producing one's own children is relatively trouble free and not involved with bureaucratic red tape and big expenses and the actual production is considered a high pleasure, adoption really cannot compete.

I think you may have misunderstood me. I do believe that human rights are granted by a deity, but I don't believe that it disapproves of asexual reproduction, or (explicitly) of cloning.

(I say explicitly because you could make an argument that some verses have rules that could be used to apply to cloning, but that's another story)

My issue here is that you have painted people who potentially have these beliefs as childish and stupid. If you have an argument, I want to hear it. That's why I started this thread. But as soon as you start resorting to insults, you've lost the argument and embarassed yourself.

No doubt there are sparks of occasional capability in a few theists but one should not confuse sparks for a roaring fire.

According to my above comments, you lose.