what r the disadvantages of Human cloning?
205112
The disadvantages is that something might go awry, your clone might commit a crime and the one being caught is you. The clone knows your secrets and might betray you, he knows your feelings and weaknesses and can overpower you. Human cloning also resembles the making of another person which is forbidden by some religions as only God can create lives, not men. If men clone, they are implying that they are omnipotent which they are not.
251897
Investigate cloning. Clone some plants
510687
Well Dolly was the last of many attempts you should have seen all the other messed up sheep before her and she even died real soon. Mankind has a body, a soul and a spirit. Clones for sure have a body. And they have a will which is the soul. But do they have a spirit?. The soul is mans intelect and his desires. Sure they have that. But then again we are starting with Gods creative material and just copying it are we not. The spirit is what makes men different then all other creatures. Humans have a spirit. Do two people have the same spirit no not even twins. A clone might have all the trates of the original DNA donor but would be a diferent creation. Just as twins are different people.
171926
Unethical. This is just the start to trying to develop "perfect" human beings free from defects. What makes us human is all of our imperfections. Cloners are saying people with handicaps and some that are born with defects are no good.
212621
The cloning of animals, while promising, has many problems that would need to be adressed before the cloning process would be more effective than simply breeding the animals. A surprisingly low success rate of creating clones, along with the possibility of genetic defects being passed on and the expensive equipment required to perform these processes are large deterrents to cloning in today's world.\n   \n   The famous sheep, Dolly, was one out of numerous attempts to clone a single sheep.  Creating multiple clones would require either an enormous amount of equipment or an improvement on current methods to prevent only a small population of clones successfully being created.  In addition, any flaws in methods used could result in genetic defects.\n\n   Any unseen genetic defects in an animal to be cloned could ruin a large number (if not all) attempts to clone the animal.  Any animal to be cloned could possibly need extensive testing before the cloning process begins; again, slowing down the idea of mass-producing foods or medicines without the use of more equipment to attempt to create more clones.\n\n   Cloning equipment, in order to do its duty, needs to be precise.  Such equipment will not come cheaply.  While in the future, prices of this equipment may drop due to the aging of the technology or the possibility of mass production in the future, it is still expensive, as no kinds of grants or rebates by any government organization exist(as far as I know).\n   \n   If cloning equipment and techniques were improved upon, the cloning of animals would be very helpful to society.  As these techniques are now, however, it is not much more beneficial to clone animals as it is to simply breed them; a much more cost-effective solution for the present.
392248
It could open up reproductive possibilities for sterile couples. It could help reduce instances of genetic diseases such as Down's Syndrome or sickle cell anemia. Switching tracks a little, cloning individual organs (not whole humans) could help improve transplant stock, not only by creating more organs for transplant, but also by cutting down on instances of organ rejection. \n\nRemember, though: no one is talking about actually cloning humans these days. Those genetic experts who are involved in cloning projects are either concerned with animals, organs, or single-cell organisms. Hope this helps put the question into a little bit of perspective!
250898
Advantages is that they produce more food, therefore feeding more people, especially for those countries in need.\n\nHowever, they are genetically modified and some people are afraid of gm foods.
358451
I don't agree with cloning or interfering with nature to this degree.\n\nI think sometimes scientists get obsessed with getting their names in the history books and lose sight of the bigger picture.
456411
when human clone they would tend to think that the creation theory does not exists and therefor do away with it. The people who clone only do this for they own selfish gains which is a very bad thing and a threat to our society
433839
Well....cloning is just making out a genetically identical individual from an individual. To begin cloning is of two types..natural and artificial...Natural is the one which happens in nature by mitosis in eukaryotes and binary fission in prokaryotes...you can give tonnes and tonnes of examples for this(anything identical to another thing is a clone of tht 'another' thing........i can even say that DNA replication is cloninf of the original DNA molecule....thus cloning can be a broad term but here i m jus tellin you about cloning of organisms or cells). Artificial cloning methods are the ones which humans use for various reasons(wich are not ethical) Artificial cloning would include tissue culture, embryo cloning, tranferring a diploid nucleus to an egg cell to get an identical organism(as in case of Dolly the sheep), etc., and etc.,  so you can devide cloning into many types....................................
84090
It is the sole reason for such diversity in the human species. It is the reason why siblings, even identical twins, eventually diverge into their own personalities. Since no two individuals have the exact same neurological framework, no two individuals in this world are the same. Even clones would not grow up to be exactly alike since the external environment plays a role in building neuron connections.
202893
1. Because it still wouldn't be the same... If you truly love your child they are irreplacable.\n2. Because science makes more trials than errors before they get it right do you want to take that chance?\n3. It defies human nature.  You don't fall in love with someone or love a child like they are an object.  And cloning simply creates an "object"\n\nGood Luck
288257
Cloning currently requires a donor stem cell.  The easiest place to get a stem cell is in a blastocyst, which is essentially the beginning of an embryo.  To play devil's advocate, in order to get a stem cell, there has to be a dead "baby".  The easiest way to get a dead "baby" is to artificially inseminate an egg and incubate it.  Religious people tend to argue that that little blastocyst was a human being, while to scientists it is nothing more than a conglomeration of cells with the potential to be a human.  \n\nThat is the source of the true controversy of cloning.  Any other issues are merely sidelines or billboards for ignorance.
223621
Your point is the right point--changing DNA is interfering with God's will.  So is abortion, the death penalty, cloning of any person or animal, etc.
643162
I have enough knowledge of the genome to know that what you are pondering is currently considered unethical.  Genetic engineering is not a foolproof science by any means.  Any genetic manipulation of a plant or animal invariably results in unsuccessful specimens, i.e. plants or animals that can't even survive or are massively deformed.  \n\nTo do this to a tomato is considered a reasonable science experiment.  But when it comes to creating genetically deformed human beings it's a whole other story.  It would be tantamount to creating 1000's of Frankenstein's or elephant men in order to get one successful trait.\n\nPerhaps one day we will understand cloning and genetics well enough to do that.  But it is a long way off from where we are now.\n\n\n"The main moral objection to attempts at human cloning right now is that a child might be damaged by such an origination. Researchers have not been able to safely and reliably create non-human primates by cloning.\n\nIf there would come a day when the above safety objection was no more, the remaining ethical arguments against human cloning would be psychological (some would say, speculative) and religious (a sense that such originations violate God's will or the natural scheme of things).\n\nScience fiction and popular movies uniformly present human cloning as a terrible thing for the person originated this way and for society. It has been a great taboo to think or argue otherwise. Under some conditions, however, say, if a person was safely born with a genotype that he or she later endorsed, human cloning could be morally permissible." - wikipedia
111183
Although most conservative Jewish, Islamic and Christian ethicists would be opposed to human reproductive cloning, you can probably find a number of people in each faith that argues for the procedure.  \n\nThe Islamic Fiqh CoNationsonvened in Casablanca in 1997 and found that non-human cloning is permissible, but that human cloning is impermissible because it would result in intractable social problems.  However, some Muslim naitons, such as Iran, have promoted embryonic stem cell research.\n\nThe Vatican, and in particular pope John Paul II and presumably pope Benedict XIV, are completely oposed to any from of Human Cloning.\n\nMost conservative Protestant teachings oppose human cloning.  There are a number of liberal Protestant teachings that find human cloning acceptabl.e\n\nSimilarly, more conservative Jewish thinkers oppose human cloning and more liberal ones do not.  \n\nAgain, it is hard to make generalizations regarding Judiasm, Islam and Christinanity, because you will find at least one person in each religion, that while being orthodox in all respects, believes that human reproductive cloning is acceptable.
447693
You would end up with the already existing DNA being split in some way. This means that neither of the two daughter cells would have all of the genetic material they need.