I see no direct harm in it. Sometimes the value of something cannot be seen until that something has been tried. So, let's try it.

Um...aren't there some redundant options here? What's the difference between #2 and #4? And #3 and #5? I was in on the qualification, too...I can't believe we didn't catch that.

There's no difference between Options 2/3, and 4/5 ... how did such a broken survey get approved?

It is such a stupid thing to do. There are already way too many of us.

Organs only. No need to clone people. We have way too many of them already anyway.

The thing is, cloning organs interferes with nature's attempts to control the population, too. The longer people's lives, the more people there are on the earth. One of the reasons why the population is increasing is that there is a lower mortality rate, especially infant mortality. But the thing about being human is that we want to live, and most of us want to see others live, too. So if we agree to cloning organs to help people live longer, then essentially we are contributing to over-population. I'm actually OK with cloning organs, although not people, but I do think that cloning organs could lead to some of the same problems that cloning humans would. But at least it would not be wholesale cloning of a whole person, which I think is a dubious idea at best.

Enheduanna: Let's hear you make that argument when one of your loved ones is dying and could be saved via organ transplant!

sequel: No one is going to live forever with cloned organs or not.


Personally, I think it is a completely selfish thing for humans to be doing. It is completely disregarding all other life, it is so selfish. There is not enough room for us and our destruction alone, and then we bring in this crap?

sequel: that's what I'm saying--even though I may have problems with it on the theoretical level, I am human and I know I would use a cloned organ if it were an option for a loved one or for myself. (that's why I said "the thing about being human is that we want to live, and most of us want to see others live, too" and why I said I'm OK with cloning organs, even if it does contribute to a population problem.) I was simply raising the issue, following vos's comment, that organ cloning is a little problematic as well. And if you really think about it, so is organ transplantation in general, or any kind of medicine for that matter, but I have absolutely no problem with using medical advances to prolong lives.

I find it curious that cloning is being associated with over-population. My impression is that it's always going to be a lot easier to make a person by the natural means. I figure only a few wealthy people will have the resources to use cloning or cloned organs.
Also, I'm under the impression that the problems attributed to population growth are actually caused by governments that in my mind are criminally negligent or are too caught up in their political agendas to feed their people.

o/` "more of me, why not make more of me" o/`

bill: I guess actually for me population problems are just an excuse; I just don't think cloning is a good idea, for various way more abstract (and maybe sort of ethical) reasons. It seems like something with which we simply should not fudge, in fear of the large cans of worms it might open. But I don't really have a good concrete reason for why I think this. So the population objection is admittedly way oversimplifying the matter, and attributing more to it than may be warranted perhaps, but at least it's concrete!

"something with which we simply should not fudge" -- That just tickles the hell out of me!! LOL

Joking around aside, I totally agree. Cloning organs seems reasonable, but cloning a whole person is too creepy. Besides that, WHY should we clones humans? I can't think of any good reason.

I think it would be cool to have some people in the world who were clones. It would be interesting to see what they were like and if they were different in any way.
There's some slight possibility that cloning could become essential for the survival of the human race, so why not get a little practice in beforehand?
Enheduanna, here's an alternate concrete reason you could latch onto: if cloning humans becomes common, society's need for mothers will be diminished. Potentially, our male-dominated society could use this to justify taking away even more of a woman's rights.

What does it matter if the human race dies out? I mean, if you and I are dead anyway, why should we care if everyone else is, too?

I think most humans really don't want the race to die out, especially parents. I have to admit that even I would prefer that the human race lived on and on.

I thought of a good example where cloning would be pretty reasonable. A couple who wants to have a child, cannot for whatever reason and this reason also prevents them from using in-vitro fertilization as well. In that case, I think cloning one of the parents would be a reasonable way to have a child.

What is the difference between "Support only cloning of human organs".. and "Support cloning of human organs, but not supoort cloning of human"?

bill - That does seem like a decent reason to clone a human, but it's still really freaky. I wonder what the clone's personality would be like.

send in the clones

Isn't it queer

I think of a clone as something like an identical twin, only with years of age difference. If there was a twin of you, 30 years younger - living and growing up in a different environment - I think you'd get a pretty different person out of it. ...it would be interesting to see.

Well, this might seem really dorky, but where does the soul come from? How do we know the clone would really be completely human in every way, and not like a Frankenstein monster?

Clonning is bad for the gene pool :(

Actually there are differences between choices 2 & 4, 3 & 5. Choice 2 means "Support only cloning of human organs", but have no comments about cloning of human, whereras choice 4 means support cloning of human organs, but oppose the idea of cloning human. I think there should be some differences between no comments about the idea and opposing the idea.

The clone would not even be as close as an identical twin. It's not only socio-environmental factors that would shape it, but also biological - the same genetic material developing at a different time in a different womb/incubator/what have you would actually be physically different. There are a lot of tiny steps in embryo development, many small errors and chance happenings.

Wow! Many people vote in a short period of time! Thanks for filling in this short survey! I found that many of you vote for choice 7, which is "Others". But it seems that many people do not fill in the comment. I know filling in the comment is not a must, but as you can see in the description of survey, comment is the most important part of this survey. So I hope if you are the one who haven't give comments, please consider edit your vote and write a few words. Thank you.

SueBee - Frankenstein's monster was actually very human (from the book more than the old movies), just misunderstood. In some ways, he was more human than the people around him.
If cloning actually did produce a soul-less human, I think it would surprise a lot of people and perhaps a lot more people would go back to believing in God. ...there's only one way to find out.
Personally, I think the concept of a soul is more metaphorical and less physical or actual. Also, it's possible that if souls really do exist, that clones would just magically get them as well.

I don't give a flying rats ass.

It seems these options are a failed attempt at cloning.
There is no [neither] option here. [Not support both...] could still mean supporting one. How did this thing pass?

asmd: they probably voted [other] in the absence of a [neither] option.
Why do it? Do we feel society is now perfect and earth should be made a perpetual museum? Even non-genetic plant hybridizations and innoculating against diseases has created problems. Are we going to turn the entire planet bio-mass into something that could be knocked entirely off it's feet in a swoop as fast a global internet virus? Is sex boring now? We need to get the scientists off this planet and find them something new to do. We got into trouble from the moment we discovered fire and farming if you ask me.

micah: would you please stop regurgitating my days subject matter? And go find some avocados for god's sake.

There goes the pigeon.

I have not been nor do I ever expect to be in a position to offer financial or moral support to people doing this work.

It sounds like cool work, though.

Is that a cloned flying rat or a natural-born flying rat?

I think it is a good point that cloning (people) is too expensive to contribute significantly to overpopulation; we make them so fast already. The real problem comes from longer lifespans caused by superior medical technology (maybe thats why only the rich get good medical care in this country - a sort of unnatural selection).

Of course, overpopulation is a fictitious problem anyway, and will remain so for the next century or so. If we can fit 8 million people in New York City (area 300 square miles), imagine what we could do with all that empty space in Texas (area 270,000 square miles).

The real problem is food distribution, and I think we've already discussed animal cloning somewhere.

I read an article where a doctor brought up that a couple could clone their kids if they needed a bone marrow transplant or something.. I thought that sucked

I think it would be really cool to clone a copy of myself, and then in around 20 years transplant my brain/self into the new young body.

It's all so unnatural....

We're born...we catch diseases....we age...we have accidents...we die......It works....leave it the hell alone.

We are already so far removed from what actual natural humans should be that we can't even think logically anymore(Yes, me too..I admit it...)....
Sometimes we go too far in our attempts to improvelife for humans here on earth. We go too far to improve life expectancy.We make possible longer lives and then scramble to find new drugs and treatments to cure the disease of aging and it's subsequent symptoms....natural symptoms....it's sick really.
Where is the natural balance? I am beginning to think that I don't want to live forever in some sterile, overmedicated, consumer driven undernatural society.

Damn...can anyone tell I watched Fight Club last night?
*snork*

I think we've already messed up enough stuff that we don't fully understand the repercussions of.

this is a weird question

davec: We are not the brain/self. Just as many can take astral flights and take their intellect along with them, it is also possible to go out of body and witness yourself, including the intellect, just rambling on like a machine, though it takes itself seriously interpreting even multiple levels of reality and believing itself to make decisions. Reincarnation is much more interesting. Cloning is just entropy.

Everyone that has said that cloning would be cool should take a second to imagine what it would be like to BE the clone.
We have enough reasons in this world for stupid, ignorant people to hate those that are different without introducing a section of the population that would effectively be second-class citizens. Technology is over-taking society's ability to deal with it. Do you really think a vat-grown human clone wouldn't experience the worst kind of prejudice?
And what kind of life would it be if you knew that at any moment your body would be used by some old rich white guy to relive his misspent youth.
Or maybe you would never even be allowed to wake up.

icurok - if we think like that, then we should also work on creating a test that determines if an human fetus will grow up to be a homosexual and abort if so - to spare them the prejudice. Oh, and the same goes for black people too. Oh, there's so much prejudice we could solve in this manner!
It would be very hard to determine face-to-face if a person was a clone, so it would also be hard to be prejudice against them.
Also, the comment from davec is ludicrous (I assume it was in jest), it wouldn't be legal to pop the brain out of some clone to put your brain in their instead! ...if you're going to do that, you might as well find a body that's better looking. - but make sure you hide the evidence, because you just committed murder.

It is interesting though... the gut reaction people seem to have against cloning. It reminds me of nuclear power and various uses of radiation (e.g. irradiated food). Despite good evidence that both are reasonable, people rallied against them because of gut-level negative associations and poof, they're gone.

I think growing pigs (say) with human spare parts in them is perfectly reasonable and even a good idea. I think cloning people is stupid, although not actually bad, so I marked that I don't support it. But neither do I think it should be banned.

I agree, it is very unnatural. It is sick!!! We all have a purpose here on earth. Cloning is, I feel, is trying to fight the inevitable, the first death. We will all face it, it is important what we do until that time, to avoid the second death. I have no fear of the first death, which is inevitable. I would fear the second death which does not have to be inevitable, if we live the way God wants us to. It would be the second death I would fear.

bill: if cloning humans is anything like cloning sheep, it is unlikely to mean artificial gestation. So we'll still need surrogate mothers, much as we do now for infertile couples for whom in vitro fertilization won't work. As to your identical twin comment: identical twins already turn out quite differently. Just look at Pomeranian!

bill - I read my comment again. Nowhere did I advocate the screening and/or aborting of anyone likely to be the subject of prejudice in their life, nor would I. So I'm curious as why you have extended what I said to include this.
What I was referring to was for anyone advocating the cloning of human beings (admittedly not many among us) to spare a thought for the clone. Maybe I'm just not that optimistic about the future. I can well imagine any clones allowed to live within society being bar-coded or branded in some other way due to public pressure to do so.

Yeah I would want a twin.

I would clone Chris, he's fiiinnnnnneeeeeeee.

I'd clone a monkey
monkeys are fiiiiiiiiiineeee

icurok - I was extrapolating to make a point. I couldn't think of anything that was exactly like the clone situation. I think avoiding something because of fear that discrimination will occur is in itself another form of discrimination.

I think many people have a cheesy sci-fi movie impression of what a clone is. phi points out that it would be likely be born of a womb like most humans are. sequel points out that a clone would actually not look exactly like the human it was cloned from. So... clones are actually a lot more normal than you might think.

I do agree with phi, that it's kind of silly (a lot of trouble for little apparant gain). But, there's a lot of science that we do just because we can, just so we can see what's possible.

extrapolate is a cool word

so is...monkey

I don't think cloning people is a good idea at this point. I do think cloning human organs is probably a very good idea - especially since people are notoriously unwilling to give up their own organs once they're done with them.

I do think that this problem will not have any real significance for quite some time. Let's imagine it were possible, today, to create a human clone. Who would do it? Some rich people in Europe or America, just to prove it could be done (kind of like the head transplant experiments). Meanwhile, while the insemination procedure goes on, another million people are born in India, China and Africa. The world population will be unaffected by cloning for the forseeable future and I think ethics will be largely unaffected as well, becuase the problem scale will be small. Cheap labor and expendable bodies already exist in large numbers on the Earth, just like they always have. There's no point in raising an army of clones to do your lawn work: that's what Mexicans are for.

I thought mexicans did the cleaning and the fruit-picking?

If a lot of Mexicans do that kind of work it's because they're not too lazy to get off their asses and work hard to support their families and make their lives better. I admire that kind of work ethic.

SueBee - you are correct that that's why Mexicans do yard work and Jamaicans don't (oh boy I'm really digging myself a deep hole this time) but the fact remains that Mexicans wouldn't do the work if they had enough money to do something else. And most Americans, while also lazy, do have enough money that they can pay Mexicans. They'd use clones if they could get them cheaper!

SueBee: All the cleaning folks at my company are Mexican. When I stay late the place becomes overrun with them. And they don't seem all that industrious to me, they spend large gobs of time in the restroom area chatting with each other in Spanish.

anon #2 - They are probably talking about how much of a loser you appear to be.

*snork*

I speak Spanish. The snippets I have heard of their conversations all relate to how they can best get men to pay their way so they can sit at home and do nothing.

We are terrible (at least I'm not anonymous). Anyway, our cleaning guy is industrious but not Mexican. I believe he is from El Salvador. The cleaning people at Sun used to steal stuff but I don't know whether they were Mexican either (they were clearly Central American). I always got the feeling that Mexicans were, by and large, pretty decent people. Of course their political system is completely rotten, but I don't think that says anything bad about the regular working-class types.
Now that I think of it, though, I don't believe I have ever met a Mexican professional! Maybe they just don't come to Boston? Come on, there have got to be some Mexican engineers or whatever. Ramble.

Go to Southern California. Plenty of Mexican professionals there. (And not just professional gardeners and cleaners either!)

I think for scientific and medical purposes cloning can be very beneficial, but I do not believe that we should clone humans...on second thought though...how bad could it be to have millions of Andyroo's running around!?!? :)

anon #4 - I think you are most likely full of crap.

why be a frankenstein? and create a monster?

Nope. 100% true. Last night one of the women was talking to her companion complaining that her husband only makes $10 per hour, which forces her to do this work rather than staying home.

Ah well, then I'd guess that has nothing to do with them being Mexican. If she felt that way, maybe she should have found a husband who could fulfill her needs better.

*sarky* It's more about her being a typical woman then, isn't it??????
It's not about the color of her skin or the country she was born...I mean, we all know how most women would rather not work and just be financially supported by men so they can stay home and watch telly and gossip and eat bon bons!!!!!!!

"sarky"?

mmmmmmmmmm
*sarcastic*

I think that human cloning will only have a positive affect on the world because the advantages far outweigh the disadvantages .

On Human Cloning .

I would just like to say that Sunday's article "Clone Wars" showed a very anti- cloning bias.
I am a supporter of cloning and believe that cloning will have a significant impact on the future of business, industry, and general labor.

Cloning relates to the issue of genetic ownership. A clone should have no independent rights. Once the clone is of age it can be sold or put to work for no wage. Instead having to hire people you can simply mass produce some clones of yourself and in 20 years put them to work.
My God, it's beautiful, can't you just see factories and fields filled with the free labor of clones?

Before flagrantly soiling your reputable newspaper with anti- cloning propaganda, you should consider both sides of the argument and accurately present how cloning can benefit mankind in the future.

i think that cloning a human is bad because the poor clone is parentless and how would you like it if you're parentless and was never knowing about it? thats really sad!

that's really bad, and you are heartless!

i know we all want to say that we dont support human cloning whatsoever, even the cloning of organs. however, although we dont want to admit it, if you knew that a loved one was going to be in fatal condition in the near future (god forbid) and could be saved via organ transplant, would you or would you not then support the cloning of organs!? think about it...

has anyone seen "The Island", with scarlett johansson?? anyways, if you havent, and you are interested in this topic, you should see it. but when i watched that movie, i SO wanted to say "human cloning is absolutely heartless and cruel and should be more strictly banned". however, like i said in my previous comment, i can bet you your morals would completely change if you or your loved one was IN THAT CONDITION.

You're wrong. I strongly support the cloning of organs and I have no problem saying it.