Debate Cloning-**** Your Morals!

Used to cure illnesses yes. Used to improve food production no.

Plants and animals have been evolving together and have developed balance cycles and dependancys on each other. Humans it seems are incapable of fitting in with this. It doesn't take cloning to solve world hunger, improve taste or boost nutritional value and we shouldn't be trying to find an easy solution. These delicate balances shouldn't be messed with, we should work with nature not against it.

Also, is it even possible to argue without opinion?

 

Recombinant cloning... i think.

Cloning in animals, such as Dolly the lamb, works by obtaining the egg cell of a female animal, stripping it of it's genes, and fertilizing it with the nucleus of a cell from the animal you wish to clone. It is a fact, however, that animals become less healthy as they enter old age because of DNA's inability to split and copy itself perfectly. Therefore when using the DNA from an animal cell to create a clone, the newborn will have a life expectancy of however many years the original animal has left.

Because of complications such as this that occurr due to the complexity of all animals' genetic structures, I say no cloning humans at least until technology makes far greater advancements.

 

I don't understand what the moral argument is anyway. What are clones but twins? That's what fraternal twins are, clones, clones of you DNA or are you the clone of theirs?

 

It's going to be pretty hard to have intercourse with an abstract philosophical concept.

*coughcough*
Anyway... I think recombinant cloning is a bad idea. Creating a virus intentionally to rewrite the basic commands that the organism in question follows just seems like a bad idea. One tiny mistake could end up killing thousands of crops.

 

Not really. They test for that sort of stuff. What do you think the FDA is there for? Besides a lot of cloning is very useful for forensics, medicines, improving plant nutrition and preservation.

 

I just read a book over the summer called The House of Scorpions, it was about a clone. I bring this up beacause other clones in the book weren't special and are basically living things that have a chip in their brain that tells them to listen to order and their brains erased so they can't think for themselves like the protaginist.

I also bring this up because this will be the fate of cloning:
Living things used at tools and medicine. Used as tools? Reminds me of slavery.


Don't think this will happen? then you're wrong, people have taken advantage of everything like other people. Black people had no sense of ownership and weren't greedy like the white people that enslaved them. This WILL happen in the future if clones are introduced because we have greedy companies and goverments that will do anything to make money, including using other human beings.

Edit: sorry Vinny, i had to use one of my Morals which was human rights I know you and some others would understand.

We are incapable with balance in nature, our habits, thoughts, emotions, only we have it and it makes us care for others, wonder why we are here, want to live longer to expierience more, ect.

 

The moral argument is for using them to help treat someone's diseases by giving them healthy cells. The morals come into play because this would, in effect, "kill them." Basically, some people consider it murder, and some people don't. It's the same basic argument as with stem cell research.

And I know that the FDA screens that stuff, but it could still have negative, long-term side effects that aren't immediately evident. Plus, viruses are capable of mutating, and I'm pretty sure that there is no foolproof safeguard against that. Now, it probably won't become the potato's version of polio or smallpox, but it could still mutate into something that would be detrimental to the crops.