• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Which type of judges would support human cloning?

Which type of judges would support human cloning?


  • Total voters
    20
Meaningless strawman. A comparable situation would be a doctor performing IVF for a couple where both parents are known carriers of Tay Sachs. The government cannot reasonably prevent two people two from having sex. It damn well can prevent doctors from knowingly performing treatments that are harmful.

It's not a straw man, you are simply being logically inconsistent. It shouldn't do either.
 
Well everyone of your cells has all the dna information to make the entire you. However most cells only have a portion of that DNA active so heart cells only make heart cells, lung cells only make lung cells. I have no clue how that actually works but thats what I hear. I agree to be able to grow stem cells and control which parts of the DNA activate is very challenging.

To grow entier humans to harvest parts crosses even my moral boundaries, hibernated or not, and I'm a fairly open minded person. Right now you have to have no moral compass what-so-ever to think that's acceptable.

In 1972 I joined the association for the proper application of science. Our main objective was to adamently oppose the use of cloning for reproducing "famous" humans or the harvesting of human clones. I have never once waivered from that. We support stem cell research and simliar studies but when it comes to harvesting cloned humans or animals for that matter my answer is NO. I was surprised alittle by a survey recently that said that 78% of academic scientists support this position. Why so low?
 
In 1972 I joined the association for the proper application of science. Our main objective was to adamently oppose the use of cloning for reproducing "famous" humans or the harvesting of human clones. I have never once waivered from that. We support stem cell research and simliar studies but when it comes to harvesting cloned humans or animals for that matter my answer is NO. I was surprised alittle by a survey recently that said that 78% of academic scientists support this position. Why so low?

Caring more about the life of an animal than the life of a human is morally repugnant.
 
???? what does this say I could not understand it.

LOL! :lamo


me neither, I dont know what I did.:shock:

it should say:


how in the hell do you group stem cell research with cloning a human being.
 
Caring more about the life of an animal

than the life of a human is morally repugnant.

I am not a member of PITA and don't support them. I did not say This. I was a wildlife biologist for many years. I went into the program because I believe it is our job to be stewards of the things wild and free contrary to the crap in the old testament. God put them here and blessed them. It is not our place to destroy things he blessed.

Having said that as a wildlife biologist I have had to kill my share of animals in order to save the group a standard game management proceedure. I also think commerical poachers are the lowest form of life on earth and it doesn't bother me one a bit when one goes down considering what they do and the way they do it. And especially what they have done to so many of my colleagues over the years. Only the most coldest of hearts would think their actions as accceptable.

This issue here is not one over the other but accepting that the type of practice I have described being condoned is immoral.

You can talk to me all day about livestock but if you read this thread that is not what we are talking about.

You can think what you want about what you think my views are but if you follow the word it is NOT your place to judge me. You absolutist views are getting old quick. The world is not all black and white and I assure you not that as simple as you make it out.
 
LOL! :lamo


me neither, I dont know what I did.:shock:

it should say:


how in the hell do you group stem cell research with cloning a human being.

I think you missed it JC. What we are discussing is the ability to use stem cell resarch to heal or replace certain parts of the body which apparently is being worked on. the idea stem cells being able to recreate a human is nonsense. Too many variables.

Organs and tissues = Probably yes

People= no
 
I think you missed it JC. What we are discussing is the ability to use stem cell resarch to heal or replace certain parts of the body which apparently is being worked on. the idea stem cells being able to recreate a human is nonsense. Too many variables.

Organs and tissues = Probably yes

People= no

What are you talking about?
missed what?

Im talking about the OP, the OP, groups stem cell research and human cloning together in a voting black, thats nonsense.
 
What are you talking about?
missed what?

Im talking about the OP, the OP, groups stem cell research and human cloning together in a voting black, thats nonsense.

Sorry I thought you were talking to me? My bad.
 
You can think what you want about what you think my views are but if you follow the word it is NOT your place to judge me. You absolutist views are getting old quick. The world is not all black and white and I assure you not that as simple as you make it out.

I'm sorry you feel that way, but there is no room in this life for shades of gray thinking about morality. That kind of thinking is what has led us to the ruination we are in as a society. There are indeed moral absolutes, and the sanctity of human life is absolute. To protect an animal when a human could benefit from the death of that animal is monstrous.
 
I'm sorry you feel that way, but there is no room in this life for shades of gray thinking about morality. That kind of thinking is what has led us to the ruination we are in as a society. There are indeed moral absolutes, and the sanctity of human life is absolute. To protect an animal when a human could benefit from the death of that animal is monstrous.

are you even reading what people are posting? lol
your post makes no sense
 
It's not a straw man, you are simply being logically inconsistent. It shouldn't do either.

Its not logically inconsistent in the slightest, its the entire basis of how medicine interacts with the law. If a citizens wants to treat his cancer with some homeopathic medicine, its none of the governments business. If a doctor does the same things, they are looking at a giant lawsuit and the loss of their medical license. People in positions of authority and responsibility are held to a higher standard.
 
Which sort of judges or Supreme Court justices would be more sympathetic to human cloning, stem cell research, or other sorts of bioethics issues? Liberal judges or conservative judges?

What do you all think?

Conservatives would hate these areas.

One Conservative half would see it as playing god and the other half would fear the change impact that such advances in human cloning, stem cell research, or other sorts of bioethics issues would bring.

The positive part of conservative thought is when it fights declining standards in society and acts as a balance to ideas that could have a negative or disasterous impact.

The negative part of conservative thought is it's intolerance to any change and it's need to try and cling to the past it can cause a lack of any positive momentum in a country.
 
In 1972 I joined the association for the proper application of science. Our main objective was to adamently oppose the use of cloning for reproducing "famous" humans or the harvesting of human clones. I have never once waivered from that. We support stem cell research and simliar studies but when it comes to harvesting cloned humans or animals for that matter my answer is NO. I was surprised alittle by a survey recently that said that 78% of academic scientists support this position. Why so low?

Probably cause they have positions like mine. Mine is I have no problem cloning animals or at least their parts especially if its for food production. I have no problems with cloning human parts or whole humans. There is only one caviet. That is this, to clone either human or animal they must have permission from the owners. Humans own themselves, and humans own animals. I have friends who are getting ready to do a start up to clone animal skin for use in leather goods in hopes of perfecting the process for human skin grafts for burn victims, they want to licence the printing procedure for their first products. They see a lot of possibilities besides medical with these sorts of tecniques. One of them even wants to make real fur jackets without having to wack the mink they get the fur from he thinks mink skins can be cloned fur and all. He seems to think that PETA will go for it and help promote it even. I dont know about that but you never know. One of their goals was to make boneless beef in the lab that has all the nutrition flavor and everything without the steer and hormone injections. I am not so sure that would sell, but hey its meat without the guilt of wacking steers so who knows.
 
Which sort of judges or Supreme Court justices would be more sympathetic to human cloning, stem cell research, or other sorts of bioethics issues? Liberal judges or conservative judges?

What do you all think?

I think it would be judges owned by Corporate America because it allows a window to develop "worker bees" without birth certificates or citizenship and these could become a nearly slave type workforce. Also for the Military (conservative) to develop cloned soldier types.
 
Probably cause they have positions like mine. Mine is I have no problem cloning animals or at least their parts especially if its for food production. I have no problems with cloning human parts or whole humans. There is only one caviet. That is this, to clone either human or animal they must have permission from the owners. Humans own themselves, and humans own animals. I have friends who are getting ready to do a start up to clone animal skin for use in leather goods in hopes of perfecting the process for human skin grafts for burn victims, they want to licence the printing procedure for their first products. They see a lot of possibilities besides medical with these sorts of tecniques. One of them even wants to make real fur jackets without having to wack the mink they get the fur from he thinks mink skins can be cloned fur and all. He seems to think that PETA will go for it and help promote it even. I dont know about that but you never know. One of their goals was to make boneless beef in the lab that has all the nutrition flavor and everything without the steer and hormone injections. I am not so sure that would sell, but hey its meat without the guilt of wacking steers so who knows.

Being simplistic heres the issue and please REALLY think about this. First cloning doesn't start out as a full grown person or animal. it starts out as an infant. You have to wait until it grows to accomplish your objective. Second once the cloned human becomes "conscious" it is a thinking creature with its own rights and so your "agreement" or license" with the original is no longer valid and useless. Once it is "born" it becomes a person and is covered by the laws of this country including the 14 amendment so harming it becomes a felony. And depending on the state could result in a death sentence. This would be true in any civilized country on this earth.

As far as the animals go. They believe it or not have some protection especially if it is a wild or feral animal. Maybe you could get a licence but having worked in the trade for years, its not a easy as you think. Things such as mink, weasel and other feral animal farms/ranches are very heavily regulated and inspected regularly. the livestock industry not so much. But the point is you and/or your friends are dreaming the impossible dream the technology out there is not cheap and the road to doing this legally is years in the making plus the time and energy spend waiting for your clone to get where you want it to go.

So if your friends are millionaires and are just entering college they MIGHT have a chance with the animal part but not likely.

the cost is prohibitive, the training necessary is extensive, the regulatory and licensing is restrictive (for a good reason) and the pitfalls are endless.

Remember once a cloned human reaches conscousness its protected as a person not a clone.
 
Being simplistic heres the issue and please REALLY think about this. First cloning doesn't start out as a full grown person or animal. it starts out as an infant. You have to wait until it grows to accomplish your objective. Second once the cloned human becomes "conscious" it is a thinking creature with its own rights and so your "agreement" or license" with the original is no longer valid and useless. Once it is "born" it becomes a person and is covered by the laws of this country including the 14 amendment so harming it becomes a felony. And depending on the state could result in a death sentence. This would be true in any civilized country on this earth.

As far as the animals go. They believe it or not have some protection especially if it is a wild or feral animal. Maybe you could get a licence but having worked in the trade for years, its not a easy as you think. Things such as mink, weasel and other feral animal farms/ranches are very heavily regulated and inspected regularly. the livestock industry not so much. But the point is you and/or your friends are dreaming the impossible dream the technology out there is not cheap and the road to doing this legally is years in the making plus the time and energy spend waiting for your clone to get where you want it to go.

So if your friends are millionaires and are just entering college they MIGHT have a chance with the animal part but not likely.

the cost is prohibitive, the training necessary is extensive, the regulatory and licensing is restrictive (for a good reason) and the pitfalls are endless.

Remember once a cloned human reaches conscousness its protected as a person not a clone.

As far as the human clone goes I doubt it will ever come to pass in an industrial way. That said, I think that as long as the base material is considerd property of the individual it comes from then cloning should not be a problem. At least a wide spead one anyhow. You would be right if they grew a full clone. However if they didnt then it is a differernt story. Its still property so long as it doesnt achieve consiousness. which means basically theres no brain.

As far as what I was talking for the proposed venture, all the animals would provide would be genetic base material. There might be some live animals but they would be kept for genetic sampling. They would probaly be rotated with ranches to provide a variety of samples. There would be no mink ranch, or steer ranch. They would be kept in a lab setting for access to their genetic material. My friends want to litterally print animal skins and meats. Its not cloning the actuall animals. Why do that when you can just breed them? The technology to do this is expensive, just not as much as you think. The main expense is going to be working the bugs out of the manufacturing process. They want to do leather goods first and get experiance with that process before they move on to the medical skin graft stage. they eventually want to be able grow vat meats as a precurser to growing organs and replacement parts for people. Its acrawl before you walk before you run thing. The heavy regs are gona come from the FDA on the medical and food sides. The leather not so much. One of their cooler ideas was to litterally grow custom fit virtually seamless leather garmets. Imagine a pair of custom fit leather gloves with No seams in them. Or a jacket. I thought that was a cool idea. Not is it cool, its PETA friendly.
 
As far as the human clone goes I doubt it will ever come to pass in an industrial way. That said, I think that as long as the base material is considerd property of the individual it comes from then cloning should not be a problem. At least a wide spead one anyhow. You would be right if they grew a full clone. However if they didnt then it is a differernt story. Its still property so long as it doesnt achieve consiousness. which means basically theres no brain.

As far as what I was talking for the proposed venture, all the animals would provide would be genetic base material. There might be some live animals but they would be kept for genetic sampling. They would probaly be rotated with ranches to provide a variety of samples. There would be no mink ranch, or steer ranch. They would be kept in a lab setting for access to their genetic material. My friends want to litterally print animal skins and meats. Its not cloning the actuall animals. Why do that when you can just breed them? The technology to do this is expensive, just not as much as you think. The main expense is going to be working the bugs out of the manufacturing process. They want to do leather goods first and get experiance with that process before they move on to the medical skin graft stage. they eventually want to be able grow vat meats as a precurser to growing organs and replacement parts for people. Its acrawl before you walk before you run thing. The heavy regs are gona come from the FDA on the medical and food sides. The leather not so much. One of their cooler ideas was to litterally grow custom fit virtually seamless leather garmets. Imagine a pair of custom fit leather gloves with No seams in them. Or a jacket. I thought that was a cool idea. Not is it cool, its PETA friendly.

I get what your saying but you are still missing the point. Your friends are obviously not familiar with the physiological process of humans or animals.
You said Human Parts or whole humans. Except for some organs an entire human in necessary for this including the brain. There is no other way around it. The brain is necessary for functioning period. Some organs can some day in the future be made without the whole person. the point is money, time, regulator and licensing issues. To be conservative lets say 10-12 years.
Harvesting limbs and other major body parts requires the brain and that makes their idea if realized murder.

Again the animal thing is not viable. For meats you need a brain because you are talking about neulogical impulses to make the meat viable. There just is no other way around it. Animal parts would fall under the same process. Your friends are living in a dream world. OBTW. the use of cloning of feral animals falls under the jurisdiction of the APHIS a part of the Department of Agriculture and the US Fish and wildlife Service a branch of the Dept of the Interior. I know this from experience. the FDA has little to do with it.

I do not want to argue. What you are proposing is Sci-Fi pure and simple and the time and money you would need and the pitfall and regulatory barriers you would have to overcome would make Everest look like a sand castle. It is not well thought out and obviously does not show a fundamental understanding of anatomy and physiology. The levels of sophistication on this are extraordinary and the variables are through the roof. The number of disciplines that would have to be mastered are stagering. No one is that smart.

You are entitled to think and believe as you wish and things like this are probably nice to dream about but the reality of it is not linear and not as simplistic as you or your friends seem to think.

Let me give you a primitive example. I was a wildlife biologist for years. As such I collected skulls for research and i got many of them from rendering and feral animal farms. I was (as all wildlife biologists are) certified in my state to practice wildlife. But that was through the DNR. In order to collect skulls (meat included) from these facilities I had to have a permit from the State Ag Department/ APHIS and The USFWS. The FWS was simple I just had the DNR pass along my credentials. 6 months.
State Ag and APHIS took 18 months just for the head of a dead animal.

You do the math. You are talking about harvesting body parts or whole animals in Fresh condition. As I said in my first post on this, EVEN if you could get to the point you wanted the regs would put a major wrench in it.

I happen to believe these regs are prudent and useful.

So believe what you wish, the reality out there is not what you think. I've been there done that and know many others who have as well.
 
Depends. If the ban is religious based and preventing research that could save lives, liberals would strike it. If the ban is construed as limiting corporate rights, conservatives would strike it.
 
I think no one is asking any judge in whichever party they may be whether cloning should continue or not. They are celebrating the 25th generations of mice cloned (and counting) in Kobe, Japan (Wakayama et al, 2013). These are healthier versions that live better and more normal lives than Dolly the Sheep.

References:

Wakayama, S., Kohda, T., Obokata, H., Tokoro, M., Li, Ch., ... Wakayama, T. (2013). Successful serial cloning in the mouse over multiple generations. Cell Stem Cell, (in press) DOI: 10.1016/j.stem.2013.01.005

Generations of cloned mice with normal lifespans created: 25th generation and counting
 
Back
Top Bottom