Why is cloning people taboo?

[Ichinisan]

Like if one twin murders the other - is it murder or suicide?

Murder.

I'm sure it has happened and legal precedent can be found.

You probably meant for this to be an amusing question, but it's not really. Just a nonsense question with an obvious answer. (sorry)

 

[JEDIYoda]

You are dense. He didn't say what the dilemmas were.

Other people in this thread have tried and failed to demonstrate a real (not sci-fi) moral dilemma.

You didn't even try to contemplate the question posed in the OP. Seems lazy.

Perhaps you are reading more into this than need be, because you are a twin which in and of itself is NOT cloning....

 

[Ajay]

One obvious moral hazard would be the failed clone attempts - the untold deaths, deformities and disabilities that would occur before success. A high price to pay for something that occurs naturally anyway.

Stem line and non stem germ line genetic modification are where it's at an has already happened. I think stem germ line genetic modification is so dangerous that perhaps it should never be allowed.

Edit: Ugh, moron, used stem instead of germ - smacks forehead.

 

[Ajay]

Yes, epigenitics plus dna dont age the same

Try getting a jury to wrap their heads around methylation rates and such.

 

[jmagg]

Cuz nazi

 

[JEDIYoda]

If your last name is Mengele......

 

[mooncancook]

Same dilemma with twins. Sometimes even just siblings.

Not the same when you could have hundreds of them

 

[ondma]

You are dense. He didn't say what the dilemmas were.

Other people in this thread have tried and failed to demonstrate a real (not sci-fi) moral dilemma.

You didn't even try to contemplate the question posed in the OP. Seems lazy.

The bolded is only your opinion.

 

[mooncancook]

Anybody thinks that clone people and non-clone people will discriminate against each other? Clone people think they are superior while non-clone people think the clones are not real human. What if clone people unit against non-clone people? Makes for a good sci-fi plot. Also you may end up with some "rougue" clones, super human beings who resent they are clones and put their revenge on the society. Cloning people may recreate more problems than it solves, especially our planet is already over populated.

 

[balloonshark]

Because clones are born without souls and we all know people without souls vote for republicans.

 

[Atreus21]

Didnt read the link, only the comment and thought it was pure sarcasm which is why I liked it. If serious, take my like back .

Yes sir, definitely sarcasm.

 

[dank69]

One obvious moral hazard would be the failed clone attempts - the untold deaths, deformities and disabilities that would occur before success. A high price to pay for something that occurs naturally anyway.

Stem line and non stem line genetic modification are where it's at an has already happened. I think stem line genetic modification is so dangerous that perhaps it should never be allowed.

Is it really that much more difficult than IVF? I have to plead ignorance here. What causes cloning to have a higher failure rate than IVF? Is it just lack of experience at this point? Were there lots of failures when we were first developing IVF? If so, why were the failures acceptable then?

 

[dank69]

Anybody thinks that clone people and non-clone people will discriminate against each other? Clone people think they are superior while non-clone people think the clones are not real human. What if clone people unit against non-clone people? Makes for a good sci-fi plot. Also you may end up with some "rougue" clones, super human beings who resent they are clones and put their revenge on the society. Cloning people may recreate more problems than it solves, especially our planet is already over populated.

This is a lot of slippery slope stuff and reminds me of the things people said about "test tube babies" when we were developing that tech.

 

[dank69]

Not the same when you could have hundreds of them

Who wants a hundred kids? How many people in the world do you think could even afford to feed and raise 100 kids?

 

[Atreus21]

Anybody thinks that clone people and non-clone people will discriminate against each other? Clone people think they are superior while non-clone people think the clones are not real human. What if clone people unit against non-clone people? Makes for a good sci-fi plot. Also you may end up with some "rougue" clones, super human beings who resent they are clones and put their revenge on the society. Cloning people may recreate more problems than it solves, especially our planet is already over populated.

It would transplant seamlessly into the Blade Runner universe.

 

[JEDIYoda]

Because clones are born without souls and we all know people without souls vote for republicans.

What took so long??? You my friend are the recipient of the Golden Thumb Award!

 

[Muse]

What would make a clone baby a "slave?" My twin brother and I are basically clones and we are not slaves.

Twins are one thing, very different from the idea of cloning 1000+ individuals with identical DNA. They could be subjugated, at least theoretically, and tasked the same to make a workforce that become 2nd class citizens. I'm sure this has been treated in books and likely movies.

 

[Muse]

That's not how this works.

I was just pulling your leg.

 

[Muse]

Who wants a hundred kids? How many people in the world do you think could even afford to feed and raise 100 kids?

Some can, and some of them might want an army of slaves to attend to them. They used to castrate slaves you know.

 

[ondma]

Is it really that much more difficult than IVF? I have to plead ignorance here. What causes cloning to have a higher failure rate than IVF? Is it just lack of experience at this point? Were there lots of failures when we were first developing IVF? If so, why were the failures acceptable then?

Yes, it is much more difficult. Maybe if you dont understand such basic facts, you should not espouse the procedure so vigorously.

 

[dank69]

Yes, it is much more difficult. Maybe if you dont understand such basic facts, you should not espouse the procedure so vigorously.

I'm not espousing the procedure. I'm asking what the problems are since I don't know. What makes it much more difficult?

 

[dank69]

Some can, and some of them might want an army of slaves to attend to them. They used to castrate slaves you know.

I already constrained this thought experiment to exclude slavery. A clone would have to have all the same rights as anyone else. If you can't keep within the constraints then you aren't actually contributing.

 

[Muse]

I'm not espousing the procedure. I'm asking what the problems are since I don't know. What makes it much more difficult?

OK, an idiot's response (I have no formal education in things biological):

IVF is just turning a viable zygote into a human.

Cloning you have to produce identical viable zygotes first, and that after identifying what zygote you prefer someway or another.

 

[dank69]

OK, an idiot's response (I have no formal education in things biological):

IVF is just turning a viable zygote into a human.

Cloning you have to produce identical viable zygotes first, and that after identifying what zygote you prefer someway or another.

Okay, idiot's retort:

I thought IVF started with getting some sperm to fertilize some eggs. I assume this isn't easy and required a lot of trial and error to get to whatever success rate we enjoy today, which I also assume is not 100%. Then I think they choose something like the 5 or 10 most viable to attempt to implant. I would think this part would be pretty much the same as with clones.

With cloning, I assume the difficulty comes with trying to combine the DNA with an ovum. I don't consider failures here to be any less ethical than abortion, and certainly no less ethical than IVF failures.

Now, the question is, are there higher rates of failure further into development, and if so, why?

 

[Ichinisan]

The bolded is only your opinion.

Please quote the valid moral dilemma you saw in this thread before my post.