In 10-15 years from now cloning will be as normal and feasible as is a X-ray photo, so all of us will come directly or indirectly in contact with cloning.
Bacteria/viruses/fungi have all already long ago been cloned. Animals were the next in line and with Dolly they were cloned as well.
The only step remaining are humans. International law allows cloning of embryos, IF they are destroyed afterwards.
However, efforts are undertaken to clone a whole human being.
What’s the future of this all…and where do u stand in such a dilemma.
More importantly what will be the legal status of a clone. Because one can imagine that with a clone of a kidney patient it will be very easy to get a suitable kidney. Are we allowed to use clones as a reservoir of spare-parts?
Do clones have an independent right of living or will they always be subject to the wishes of the donor???
More importantly what will be the legal status of a clone. Because one can imagine that with a clone of a kidney patient it will be very easy to get a suitable kidney. Are we allowed to use clones as a reservoir of spare-parts?
[/QUOTE]
As stem cell research advances it should be possible to grow just organs so an actual person would not be needed.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by JonyBr: *
I heard they paased a bill in UK to clone humans for a research porpuse only ? or is it just a romour?
[/quote]
indeed, it was so some time ago, but then debates rose about this matter and it got postponed. Now they are trying to get internationally accepted law and regulations. But as for now nothing concrete has been undertaken
[quote]
The Concept of God will get greatly confusing for a normal man bcos creatures will become creators, thus science will end up acting God.
[/quote]
very interesting point you make. Raises two question for me:
Do we give God only the function of Creator? In other words, suppose we do create humans, will that mean the end of God???? So, in order to keep God, we aren't allowed to clone.
Related to quesiton 1. I'd think that when God created the world he surely had thought of the possibility of humans creating clones and hence has surely taken precautions. Would be highly unlikely that God overlooked the possibility of cloning and now is fearing for his end?????
I tend to think that God deliberately left open the option of cloning for humans......see it as another test of mankind. I think God is waiting to see what happens and how humans will deal with their newly acquired toy
As stem cell research advances it should be possible to grow just organs so an actual person would not be needed.
[/QUOTE]
that would be the ideal situation. But it's very far off. Because simply growing liver cells will not give u a liver. A liver cell needs an exact environment to grow as a liver, and so far the only situation where it will be in such an environment will be in a human body and not in a lab
No it wont mean end of God, i said for a normal person it would be difficult to diffrenciate bcos one of the property is being shared.
Ofcourse there r billions of other properties which only God have, & even this one will never make human a true creator. Bcos every creation is infact created from the creation of God Almighty has already created. It is just, for a normal person it wpuld be difficult to concentrate as s/he would see two creators.
Yes God knew & I think it is mentioned somewhere as well that human will create a human. As well as there will be a time when a cow’s milk would be enough for a village, an apple would be big enough for number of ppl to eat etc all these changes cant come withought the genetic advancements.
Now i have few questions.
Will the cloned human have a soul ? will s/he be held responsible for the things s/he did on the day of judgement? Would s/he be a He/She or It ?
I don't look at it from a religious point of view but from a social point of view.
I enjoy the diversity around in this world, different skin colors, features & it’s exciting to see twins who look identical (even if they act totally differently) but it’s because it’s rare to have identical twins .. so cloning might have a few medical benefits, I am not sure I am ready for another ahmadjee (or that the world is ready for another W. Bush)
I understand what you are pointing to, but then i wonder: shud scientific research stop just because a normal person would get confused? i would be more important that as long the scientist himself doesn’t get confused everything is ok.
very much true. Moreover I think throughout history whenever something new was about to be introduced ppl would be against on basis of religious motives. For example: I think even for ppl going on the moon, there would be some against it since they wud see those astronauts taking up a supernatural position which is only designated for God.
Or things like the first kidney transplantation…the same reasoning was applied then, but nowadays it’s quite a normal thing
I think yes, cuz i don’t see why the clone shud be handled differently from a normal human being. S/he will have his/her own preferences, memories, etc etc. I don’t think the original person will have control over the clones movements or thoughts.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by ahmadjee: *
I don't look at it from a religious point of view but from a social point of view.
I enjoy the diversity around in this world, different skin colors, features & it’s exciting to see twins who look identical (even if they act totally differently) but it’s because it’s rare to have identical twins .. so cloning might have a few medical benefits, I am not sure I am ready for another ahmadjee (or that the world is ready for another W. Bush)
[/QUOTE]
you're right that from a social point of view ppl will get bored with cloning soon. Secondly, cloning can be used to create e.g. a war criminal or a murderer or what have you (point being that it can be used for the worse), but then i wonder whether the clone will be as bad as the original. Cuz the original went onto the wrong path not only becuz of his genes but also cuz of his upbringing and environment....and these latter two very important aspects will not be the same with the clone.
The biggest misconception of cloning is the idea that it is a photocopy of the original. In case of looks (skin color, body features, metabolism etc) the clone might be similar but the personality will totally be different, and dependent on how he is brought up.
My concern from a social point of view is the idea of certain skin colors perceived to being superior will be favored, so will there be gender preferences!
Some of the western countries might be ready for this technology but just imagine it being practiced in remote villages of south Asia? We all know what devastating effect the gender recognizing had in some cases.
Cloning a human maybe feasible in the future but would any person ethically do so ?
The UK passed a law where stem cell research can be done. From my undersatnding the eggs are donated from IVF treatment excess and destroyed before it develops into anything resembling a foetus. Stem cells taken and do whatever they want with them. If they can produce insulin cells or treat parkinson disease I'm all up for it. I see my grandad sticking a insulin needle in himself a few times a day and I dont know how he can do that to himself.
why is cloning seen as a threat to the concept of God? We are still unable to create that initial seed created by God, we have merely learnt to use it, fashion things with it.
I sadly dont have a reference here, but I remember my sister reading a passage to me in which Allah challenged the arrogant human to create the minutest part, that initial life force. and wherever we extract that blueprint of life from, we still cannot create living things out of material that does not have life.
some very interesting points. To start of with cscraja's: the most important example of scientific research goiong astray willingly or accidentally are the killer bees. Originally genetically manipulated to harvest more honey their venom became also deadlier. Subsequently they escaped from the lab somewhere in Brazil and are now terrorising ppl in the Americas.
But notwithstanding this, research has to move on as risc indicates there will always be diseases that can only be cured via genetic engineering and in a next step cloning. But then again, risc where do u draw the line. Of course helping ppl with insulin is fine, but if in a next step (suppose it is that of full cloning) we can cure some other disease, would that be allowed? or shud we draw the line at the level of bacterial cloning (for insulin)?
ahmadjee brings forward an excellent drawback of cloning. Question to you all: shud cloning be brought into commerce? My suggestion wud that goverment shud perhaps try to keep the expenses so high as that normal non-scientific ppl don't start using it commercially.
ravage: very interesting thought. Coincidentally, I was reading this article the other day that scientists had managed to create a virus out of nothing. The next step for them is to create a bacterium (becuz it is debatable whether a virus is living or not)
Where you draw the line will always be a tricky point. I at the moment I think that cloning a fused egg for stem cells is not a problem. The best way IMO is to do what the UK gov have done before any cloning can be done it has to go through a goverment agency who either allow cloning of cells to take place or refuse permission. A panel of scientists, doctors and others will make the decisson and I'm sure they will take ethical decisons involved very seriously. One problem with cloning is the media a team from Newcastle (UK) are researching stem cells into possibale cures for diabeties but the media where showing dolly the sheep and cloning humans. My mum was like they should ban that why would you want to clone your son/daughter so then had to exaplin it all. I'm no expert in medicine just a A-Level in biology but the media to off track a little to get headlines.
ravage: of course bacteria are harder, but viruses are good first step.
risc: whenever something is brought to the goverment to control it means it's out of hand already. I don't see any international regulations being made. Of course, countries individually can try to control cloning, but internationally it will be very difficult. And again, even under an umbrella illegal cloning (if cloning is prohibited) will carry on. Perhaps it will be better to be open and allow cloning. By being open it will be a bit easier to keep in eyes what is going on
^ great idea, someone should write a book based on that concept, or maybe make a movie (or two)...
Having said that, cloning and stem cell research pose significant ethical dilemmas. They both have the potential for untold benefits but a lot of things can (and undoubtedly will) go wrong.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by NeSCio: *
another interesting hypothesis would be to clone dinosaurs and bring them to life?????
[/QUOTE]
Don't we read about how thousands of species become extinct every year? Taking this forward, would cloning help us to bring the world closer and closer to what god had originally designed by recreating the lost species? Sort of repentence for all the damage mankind has caused to god's earth
