Posted by Anna on May 18, 1999 at 21:38:18:
In Reply to: Are there no supporters out there? posted by Darius Uible on May 14, 1999 at 21:37:24:
: Some of the arguments I have read here baffle me. First off, nobody can tell how similar a clone will act to its parent. In case you haven't noticed, not a single behavioral gene(s) has been established. This means that behavior can not be linked to genotypes. Before you start naming articles, remember to only mention ones without the words "may have discovered..." Many here have also mentioned "thousands" or even more copies. That's rediculous! Not even "mad scientists" in their little "evil labs" want that. Next off, the plan for cloning for "spare parts" does not involve growing adults then murdering them! The process for growing spare parts is however, closely related to cloning. It involes fusing a cell of the donor with an enucleated (having the DNA removed) egg which is well prepared for growth. AFTER this point is where the processes differ. Instead of allowing the resulting zygote to grow into a full person, it can be "trained" to instead grow directly into a particular organ while it is"fed" with nutrient-rich solutions in the container. Therefore, cloning studies are directly related to this INVALUABLE advancement. And as for the psychological effect of being a clone, it's not too far off from being adopted. And to address who would raise them, who else? The "parents" that asked for the clone to be made in the first place! Clones still need to be grown inside the human female uterus. If the "mother" carrying the child for nine months and going through labor doesn't make her enough of a mother, what does? The only difference is that none of her DNA is in the child. Or else the child contains only her DNA and none from a "father." In many respects I would call this MORE foundational than being adopted. Now I'm going to express a more extremist view, but don't judge my previous arguments based on it as they stand on their own, as does this one. Genetic engineering will yield one thing: better people. By better, I mean more healthy. If you call the human struggle to survive anything but a war, you are sorely mistaken. It is man versus the powers that be. If you don't exploit your advanced weapons, you will regret it. As for cosmetic engineering (for looks), I really don't care. Maybe people will "order" children with particular looks. But do you honestly think everyone wants the same child in their head? Get out of here... I'll bet you $1 million the child I want doesn't look very much like the one you want. Have faith in human diversity! There's a reason Blockbuster carries over a thousand movies. Because we all want something different! Ok, I've babbled on long enough. Please snap back at me and we'll talk. Please bring up topics I've failed to address. I'm sure we'll get to all of them...
So you like to argue. Cool, same here. First I'd like to address the cloning of organs. The process you mentioned is one of two. Using the other method does not include embryos. I am not opposed to this method. I am, however, opposed to any technology which requires the abortion of embryos to offer organ donations to already existing humans. I don't know what your beliefs are, but I believe that embryos are people. Killing embryos to give patients organs is unacceptable. I do not condone this method under any circustances. Before you think me fanatically and mercilous, though, I would like you to know that there are alternatives. No, I'm not refering to xenotransplants. I'm refering to two other methods. They have not been formally named, but I'll refer to them as the biodegradable platform method and the growth factor method. Neither of these methods involve cloning, the DNA still matches that of the patient, and these methods are already in use. One use, the regrowth of blood vessels, is beyond the potential of cloning. If you want more information read Scientific American's April 1999 article titled: Growing New Organs. This is a website, but I don't know the address. I'm sorry.
I should probably let you know that I'm a Catholic Christian. That will influence my ideas, but I believe that morality can be logically found in life. Therefore I'll leave doctrine out of this (unless you want to talk about it) and speak of universal moral truth.
Now for the subject of cloning whole humans. We have no right to decide a single person's genetically determined characteristics. If you believe in God, how would you feel knowing that he had no part in deciding your genetically determined characteristics? How would you feel knowing that an imperfect being decided how you would look, how smart you would be, or whether or not you would be athletic. Humans can't understand or control themselves. Deciding other's genetically determined characteristics is outside our jurisdiction.
The only weak link in this is using genetic engineering to eliminate genetic diseases. I will mention that this could be accomplished through changing genes, not copying them. It's still a question for me though.
That's all for now. f you have any info, let me know.