Will someday the idea of human cloning will be legal?
103356
Hi there, \n\nYou are absolutely right. It is likely that Human Cloning will be accepted in the future. Just think of it...Wouldn't it be wonderful to clone persons like Einstein, Socrates, and other great people who have influenced this world? \n\nBut I think there must be restrictions on whom to clone. If not, the population of this world will rise rapidly. Also, it will give rise to unnecessary chaos and disorder regarding who is who. \n\nAnd I also think the technology should be known to a limited number of scientists, because there is a likely chance of illegal cloning (as in the movie 'The Sixth Day')\nIf every person gets to know the technology, he can take the creation into his own hands, and so all the unethical things are likely to happen. \n\nSo, on the whole, Human Cloning isn't a bad idea, provided there are 'proper' laws made and 'implemented', and people think rationally.\n\nrule wid style n luv@vinny\n\nEdit: Well, I do agree with you that a lot depends on the society and the brought-up of the person, but I was just trying to bring out a point there. I needed an example thats it. I completely agree with you.
1170509
To be Leary of such is honest but what if I needed a new part for my body and you could clone it?  What would you say then?  If God allowed us to clone people,  I believe he would not be cruel and deny that cloned person a soul.  Also another question arises which is a practical one.  If a person is cloned, then they have the same DNA and fingerprints.  What if that person commits a crime and you have no alibi?  You might be mistakenly arrested.
151379
Is this what cloning basically is? Asexual reproduction? And are we headed toward making a "perfect" species?  \n*** does this mean humans will become extinct in the not too distant future?
846528
I'm still undecided on stem cell therapy.  As of right now, I'm not down with cutting up an embryo for the sake of someone else.  BUT if someone in my family were to get sick and could benefit from stem cells, I'm sure I'd be all for it.  (so what, I'm a hypocrite :)\n\nAnd cloning people is just stupid.  Why would you do that? We already have enough people running around this world.  It's a waste.  And it would morally wrong to clone ppl just for their organs.  So, again, NO on the cloning.
959456
It depends on your defination of Human cloning.\n\nStrictly speaking, embryonic stem cell research can be classified as human cloning, as it involves the cloning of a human embryo. However, the embryo is only grown so that is has 8 cells (you can't even see that without a microscope!!) at which point growth is stopped, and the stem cells are harvested.\n\nCloning an embryo and allowing it to grow into a full human being is in no way whatsoever legal in the US, or anywhere else in the world!\n\nStem cell research is immensely important to medicine, as it can potentially cure a whole range on diseases. In America, one group of researchers are near the point of creating a CURE for diabetes!! Once completed, stem cells which produce insulin can be transplanted into patients, so they will never have to inject insuling again! In the UK, a group of researchers has manged to grow liver tissue from stem cells. Although only small at the moment (the tissue is about the size of a 1p/1c coin) it will be a very useful research tool for testing and developing better drugs with less side-affects. In the future, scientists believe they will be able to grow whole replacement organs, grown to match the genetics of the patient, so there is no risk of rejection!\n\nAmerica, being the richest country in the world, with some of best research facilities, is a key player in world medicine. However, the current ban on federal funding of stem cell research in the US is slowing down the progress of the research immensely. Scientists around the world are hoping that when the Bush Administration leaves office, this ban will be lifted, so that more funding will be availble for research, and development of treatments which help patients will come a lot sooner!
271289
sure ....id love a cloned slave \n\nbut morally correct then no ....
1180676
The first steps have already been taken: human organs and stem cells have already been grown in the laboratory. New strides in genetics research such as identifying genes which cause disease are moving the scientific community ever closer to cloning a human. It would be interesting to see if a clone of a genetically mutated animal or human would exhibit the same symptoms as its duplicate. If not, what is the difference?
491568
I think there is nothing wrong with cloning. It is just creating an exact copy of someone's body, it isn't going to replicate their mind. If someone cloned Hitler, it would look like Hitler but it wouldn't actually be him. The clone would need to be raised under the exact same circumstances, and even then, he might react differently to his surroundings. It's like how twins look alike, but don't have the same personality. If they ever decided to clone humans, I'd volunteer to be a test subject, as long as I didn't have to raise my clone.
944149
Human cloning will finally decide whether we are spiritual or not.
595413
You should use your own opinion. My personal opinion on the matter though is that cloning does not necessarily mean actually producing another one of yourself. Therapeutic cloning is the act of making a cloned embryo and extracting its stem cells before they even differentiate. The use of these stem cells in research is very valuable and has the potential to save millions of lives around the world (for reasons I opt not to get into).\n\nThus, I believe therapeutic cloning should be legal. The reproductive cloning of humans however, should remain illegal. Basically, the creation of formed embryos should be allowed, but it should be illegal to implant them so that can develop into human beings.\n\nThat's my personal point of view though. This is a highly controversial subject and you really need to research it and form an opinion of your own.
28455
Disadvantages: People will deem clones to have no souls and use them in immoral ways.\n\nAdvantages: None.\n\nI can see no benefit to the actual cloning of a human being. The benefit comes from the knowledge gained from cloning. Once we have the ability to clone a human being, we can specialize in cloning just the parts that we need.\n\nImagine a person with lungs and a heart damaged from disease or an accident. Doctors can clone just the heart and lungs from the patient's own DNA and transplant them. No waiting for donors and no organ rejection.\n\nHow about cloning gallons of untainted blood as needed? No more need for donors, storage, or disease testing. Even rare blood types can be cloned as needed.
269001
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.
1115957
Not with current freezing techniques. Too much cell damage. In the future I think that a process will be possible. Will it be ethical or moral in a rapidly overpopulating world will be the ultimate question.
223925
A lot of them are ethical and moral questions.   For example, if you were going to use cloned human cells for testing of a drug, where would you draw the line?  Somewhere between a cell and a fully grown human, but who gets to make that decision of where?\n\nOr a more far out question: Imagine if you could clone your favorite movie star, celebrity or anyone else to be your husband or wife?   How many copies of the same person would we have roaming around?   And even so, would that person want to be your husband and wife anyway?  Who would be that person's parents or next of kin?   Do you really have a right to "create" that person or treat them like property?  Are they a person?   \n\nDo you see how the idea of human cloning creates a lot of issues that wouldn't otherwise exist?
361439
Introduction\nThe possibility of human cloning, raised when Scottish scientists at Roslin Institute created the much-celebrated sheep "Dolly" (Nature 385, 810-13, 1997), aroused worldwide interest and concern because of its scientific and ethical implications. The feat, cited by Science magazine as the breakthrough of 1997, also generated uncertainty over the meaning of "cloning" --an umbrella term traditionally used by scientists to describe different processes for duplicating biological material. \n\n\nWhat is cloning? Are there different types of cloning?\nWhen the media report on cloning in the news, they are usually talking about only one type called reproductive cloning. There are different types of cloning however, and cloning technologies can be used for other purposes besides producing the genetic twin of another organism. A basic understanding of the different types of cloning is key to taking an informed stance on current public policy issues and making the best possible personal decisions. The following three types of cloning technologies will be discussed: (1) recombinant DNA technology or DNA cloning, (2) reproductive cloning, and (3) therapeutic cloning. \n\n\nRecombinant DNA Technology or DNA Cloning \n\nThe terms "recombinant DNA technology," "DNA cloning," "molecular cloning,"or "gene cloning" all refer to the same process: the transfer of a DNA fragment of interest from one organism to a self-replicating genetic element such as a bacterial plasmid. The DNA of interest can then be propagated in a foreign host cell. This technology has been around since the 1970s, and it has become a common practice in molecular biology labs today. \n\nScientists studying a particular gene often use bacterial plasmids to generate multiple copies of the same gene. Plasmids are self-replicating extra-chromosomal circular DNA molecules, distinct from the normal bacterial genome (see image to the right). Plasmids and other types of cloning vectors are used by Human Genome Project researchers to copy genes and other pieces of chromosomes to generate enough identical material for further study. \n\nTo "clone a gene," a DNA fragment containing the gene of interest is isolated from chromosomal DNA using restriction enzymes and then united with a plasmid that has been cut with the same restriction enzymes. When the fragment of chromosomal DNA is joined with its cloning vector in the lab, it is called a "recombinant DNA molecule." Following introduction into suitable host cells, the recombinant DNA can then be reproduced along with the host cell DNA. See a diagram depicting this process. \n\nPlasmids can carry up to 20,000 bp of foreign DNA. Besides bacterial plasmids, some other cloning vectors include viruses, bacteria artificial chromosomes (BACs), and yeast artificial chromosomes (YACs). Cosmids are artificially constructed cloning vectors that carry up to 45 kb of foreign DNA and can be packaged in lambda phage particles for infection into E. coli cells. BACs utilize the naturally occurring F-factor plasmid found in E. coli to carry 100 to 300 kb DNA inserts. A YAC is a functional chromosome derived from yeast that can carry up to 1 MB of foreign DNA. Bacteria are most often used as the host cells for recombinant DNA molecules, but yeast and mammalian cells also are used.\n\n\nReproductive Cloning\n\nCelebrity Sheep Has Died at Age 6\n\nDolly, the first mammal to be cloned from adult DNA, was put down by lethal injection Feb. 14, 2003. Prior to her death, Dolly had been suffering from lung cancer and crippling arthritis. Although most Finn Dorset sheep live to be 11 to 12 years of age, postmortem examination of Dolly seemed to indicate that, other than her cancer and arthritis, she appeared to be quite normal. The unnamed sheep from which Dolly was cloned had died several years prior to her creation. Dolly was a mother to six lambs, bred the old-fashion
449831
Cloning a human, as any other mammals, is a quick process (often not succesful though). If all necessary equipment, DNA and egg donors are ready, it can be cloned in one day and be born 9 months later. Please do not confuse the act of cloning (i.e., the procedure itself, which includes replacing DNA of an egg with donor DNA) with the time it takes for the clone to develop in uterus, to be born and grow up (as for any normal human being, it would take years to reach maturity).\nReal cost of one cloning procedure I'd say could be a little bit higher than what people pay now for in vitro fertilization. The fact is, however, that current technology cannot ensure hastle-free and error-free cloning, therefore nobody would do it on humans (unless illegaly, but that would cost millions I'd suspect). It requires further research and science advancement, which is costly (we are talking billions here).
656095
For cloning organs/tissue but against cloning human beings