Anything Forums

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:620, old post ID:5421

Against. I find it causes more problems then anything, and is cruel. DNA is too risky to play with they should leave it as it is. And even cloning fruit, what will end up happening in the future is we will run out of real fruit and only have fake fruit, and if they notice some kind of flaw, it will be too late to go back.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:620, old post ID:5422

I could care less what they do, as long as they don't clone an army or something
I find the most applicable use for cloning is perhaps getting replacement parts for a person (i.e. Kidneys, livers)

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:620, old post ID:5423

I think using cloning to find cures for diabetes and growing new organs for transplants is what we should be looking at. But the use of cloning for "designer babies" is just wrong.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:620, old post ID:5424

Red Squirrel wrote: Against.  I find it causes more problems then anything, and is cruel.  DNA is too risky to play with they should leave it as it is.  And even cloning fruit, what will end up happening in the future is we will run out of real fruit and only have fake fruit, and if they notice some kind of flaw, it will be too late to go back.

And what about when some kind of flaw just naturally appears in real fruit?

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:620, old post ID:5425

Yeah if it's used for medical purposes such as cloning body parts then I don't have a problem with that, it beats dying or going without a crucial body part.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:620, old post ID:5426

Red Squirrel wrote: Yeah if it's used for medical purposes such as cloning body parts then I don't have a problem with that, it beats dying or going without a crucial body part.

/agreed

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:620, old post ID:5427

i approve...with limits.

cloning organs, for example, would be (and will be) huge for the medical industry.

cloning an entire human? no

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:620, old post ID:5430

negative..

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:620, old post ID:5432

fragged one wrote: i approve...with limits.

cloning organs, for example, would be (and will be) huge for the medical industry.

cloning an entire human? no

I agree. Cloning a person is just not right. And it's scary.

What I'm afraid of is that cloning organs might one day lead to cloning humans, before we can stop to think, "Wait a minute...WTF?"

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:620, old post ID:5436

Cloning organs... gooood
Cloning anything sentient.... baaaad

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:620, old post ID:5452

I don't mind cloning organs but i don't want me but not me living my life.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:620, old post ID:5468

sintekk wrote: I could care less what they do, as long as they don't clone an army or something
I find the most applicable use for cloning is perhaps getting replacement parts for a person (i.e. Kidneys, livers)

Thats the very reason i would be against it. I think though we'd have to see what clones were like. It would be a great way to share the same women, you know?



Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:620, old post ID:5479

Twins of twins

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:620, old post ID:5481

^^ a "penelope Cruz for everyone!

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:620, old post ID:5539

Red Squirrel wrote: Against.  I find it causes more problems then anything, and is cruel.  DNA is too risky to play with they should leave it as it is.  And even cloning fruit, what will end up happening in the future is we will run out of real fruit and only have fake fruit, and if they notice some kind of flaw, it will be too late to go back.

cloning wont make the fruit be" fake" it would be EXACTLY the same as the one that it was cloned from. it would still be a REAL fruit. its made up of exactly the same material and exactly the same cell/ atom structure.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:620, old post ID:5590

i also think that clonig humans would be bad, but like animals. if you pet died, you could have it cloned, so you'd never lose your pet really.


Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:620, old post ID:5592

goalguarder12 wrote: i also think that clonig humans would be bad, but like animals. if you pet died, you could have it cloned, so you'd never lose your pet really.

Meh. You could just clone your self, then sit in bed all day masturbating to porn while your other worksstudiesgets chewed out.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:620, old post ID:5606

William Wallace wrote:

goalguarder12 wrote: i also think that clonig humans would be bad, but like animals. if you pet died, you could have it cloned, so you'd never lose your pet really.

Meh. You could just clone your self, then sit in bed all day masturbating to porn while your other worksstudiesgets chewed out.

exactly. but we'd get the clone to buy the porn and lubrication too, so we wouldn't have to get out of our beds.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:620, old post ID:5608

I agree about cloning for organs to save someones life, but a full body clone and trying to make it sentient isn't something i'd agree with, how would you feel if you know your a clone, just a remake. And also would a clone have a soul? i dont know if God would give a clone a soul or not.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:620, old post ID:8377

The Muncher wrote: I agree about cloning for organs to save someones life, but a full body clone and trying to make it sentient isn't something i'd agree with, how would you feel if you know your a clone, just a remake. And also would a clone have a soul? i dont know if God would give a clone a soul or not.

Trying to make it sentient??? I think it would be more difficult to create a clone that is not sentient. Honestly, you take a single human cell, split it's DNA and start the growth of a completely new being, same DNA as the first. The new replica grows into a fully functional completely independant human being. Did you think that the clone would just grow into some type of zombie wondering around aimlessly waiting for some type of direction or order from the original human? Just because two creatures have the same DNA doesn't mean that they will not grow into two completely different people with different experiences and different knowledge than each other has.

Would a clone have a soul??? What is a soul, muncher? What is it's function? Where does it exist? We know very little about the existence or non-existence of the "soul," muchless who is blessed with having one. If there is determined to be such a thing as a soul, why would a clone not be just as worthy of one as you or I am? Because they were created from someone else's DNA??? Wasn't Eve created from one of Adam's ribs??? Did she have a soul?


Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:620, old post ID:8438

goalguarder12 wrote:

Red Squirrel wrote: Against.  I find it causes more problems then anything, and is cruel.  DNA is too risky to play with they should leave it as it is.  And even cloning fruit, what will end up happening in the future is we will run out of real fruit and only have fake fruit, and if they notice some kind of flaw, it will be too late to go back.

cloning wont make the fruit be" fake" it would be EXACTLY the same as the one that it was cloned from. it would still be a REAL fruit. its made up of exactly the same material and exactly the same cell/ atom structure.

To us it may be the same, but since DNA is very sensitive, I'm sure it can possibly create mutations that we can't notice now, but in say, 50 years from now we might discover some kind of mutation and since there won't be any natural apples (etc) left on the planet, it will be too late to go back. Since it might even cause mutations that won't do anything bad right away only in long term.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:620, old post ID:8453

Red Squirrel wrote:

goalguarder12 wrote:

Red Squirrel wrote: Against. I find it causes more problems then anything, and is cruel. DNA is too risky to play with they should leave it as it is. And even cloning fruit, what will end up happening in the future is we will run out of real fruit and only have fake fruit, and if they notice some kind of flaw, it will be too late to go back.

cloning wont make the fruit be" fake" it would be EXACTLY the same as the one that it was cloned from. it would still be a REAL fruit. its made up of exactly the same material and exactly the same cell/ atom structure.

To us it may be the same, but since DNA is very sensitive, I'm sure it can possibly create mutations that we can't notice now, but in say, 50 years from now we might discover some kind of mutation and since there won't be any natural apples (etc) left on the planet, it will be too late to go back. Since it might even cause mutations that won't do anything bad right away only in long term.

Mutations are not necissaraly bad. If you take some biology while at college, they will probably hammer that in. It's genetric mutations that give some people advantages over others. If the mutation is desirable, the population will try to spread it through its gene pool. But back to what you were saying, I think that is very possible, but I think it happens already.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:620, old post ID:8457

erolyn wrote:

fragged one wrote: i approve...with limits.

cloning organs, for example, would be (and will be) huge for the medical industry.

cloning an entire human? no

I agree. Cloning a person is just not right. And it's scary.

What I'm afraid of is that cloning organs might one day lead to cloning humans, before we can stop to think, "Wait a minute...WTF?"

erolyn, your sig, it is transporting, not sending.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:620, old post ID:8487

It's funny, when most people use the word "mutations" they automatically think of grossly deformed or disfigured things, so much so that it might make something like an apple, inedible or dangerous to eat. No one ever thinks of the mutated apple that is 10 x's bigger and juicier that can feed an entire family for a week. Either way, I don't see how cloning apples or fruit could run the risk of "dangerous" mutations. All they're doing is taking the DNA that exists and replicating it. If anything, I would think that would mean they are at less risk for genetic mutations. Am I missing something here???

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:620, old post ID:8539