Is human cloning right, and why?
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.
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?
927335
The purpose of a question like this is for YOU to take what YOU know about cloning (and for YOU to do research about it) and then for YOU to extrapolate from what YOU know to what YOU think might happen.\n\nTry watching (or reading) The Island. Just one grim outlook of many about cloning.
1020019
Working in the health care field I personally have mixed emotions. On a religious level it's just not natural to do.  However, if it were my children that needed a heart, kidney, etc. I'm certain I would consider medical professionals cloning them as a method of an exact match for replacement organs.
677675
We can clone people without sperm but it's impossible to clone people without a human egg. We don't need men to live but we do need women.
996648
It should be noted that the doomesday scenarios claimed for this technique - cloning Hitler or the like - are absolute nonsense. This takes genetic determinism to its illogical conclusion. To suggest that a clone would adopt the personality of the original is to suggest there's a gene for "genocide of the Jews", which is clearly nonsense. \n\nIt should also be noted that many people accused of being genetic determinists aren't, or at least aren't by the definition used by the accusers. When a gene "for" X is implied, there is always an unstated "given all other things being equal", and usually an "but only in a statistical sense", so a gene for a behaviour will only make it more likely, not force it.\n\nThen we have the religious objections - that the clone would not have a soul. Since embryos are cloned in the same way identical twins are formed, this would mean that identical twins do not have separate souls.\n\nThe real issue I have with this kind of science is eugenics. According to my genes, I'm dead by now - or at least many people with one condition I happen to have are. If we allow the creation and cloning of "perfect" embryos, and encourage the termination of "imperfect" embryos, we will live in a much worse-off place. We will be at the will of whoever decides what is "perfect" and what is not. What's more, people will suffer the whims of their parents. What happens when a couple order up an athlete, and the child instead spends all day fiddling with his Wii? Will they punish him for not turning out how the reciept says? Will ethnic minorities be eliminated as being imperfect? Will parents ensure they have somebody to look after them in old age order up an ugly and infertile slave child?\n\nIt's clear to me that we should ban commercial offerings of genetic manipulation of offspring right now, and also close our borders to genetically engineered humans - so treatment cannot be offered in rogue states. The ethics need a clarification and unity - is stupidity a disease?
198538
Well, there is no where in the Bible that says, "Thou shalt not clone!"  I think that people are more concerned about where the stem cells are coming from than the actual cloning.  I don't think that we can actually clone a whole human being, because of the soul factor.  We are tho only thing that God made with a soul.  As for the cloning of human organs for transplant, I'm all for it if they can get the stem cells from a source other than aborted babies.  The sad thing is, abortion is a fact of life.  I hate it and feel it is murder.  BUT, now don't all yell at me and call me a hypocrite at once, IF these poor babies are going to be murdered anyway, cuz even when it was illegal people did it anyway, then why not make their lives count for something?  Wait for it...Wait...Just one more minute...Nope, I didn't get struck by lightening.  Whew, that was close.\n\nIf I were to be murdered, God forbid, I would want my organs and tissues to be transplanted to help save the life of someone else.  Should these babies be any different?
533869
If you are talking about cloning an entire human then I think you will find the majority will say "No". However, if when you ask this question you also mean partial cloning as in cloning of organs and such, I think the answer is most definitely "Yes". The reason being is that if we could clone particular organs, think of how many lives we could save. Now this is a touchy subject, but I think if anything we should be cloning or saving we should be all for stem cell research. Stem cell research is the one thing that truly gives cancer patients, and patients with serious diseases a chance to live. The cells are new fresh cells in the human body, often found in the placenta. Essentially these cells have no chemical "ID" tag. This tag is what viruses and cancer can usually spot and use advantageously to kill the human body. When a cell has no ID tag, the disease has a difficult time latching on and killing those cells. So I believe that we should be all for stem cell research and any kind of cloning relating to this. Personally I think we should go as far as cloning organs, however again, this is a touchy subject. So the answer ultimately being no to full human cloning, and yes to cloning for healing humans who are diseased and dying. Everyone deserves a second chance at life. People will disagree to that statement until they are the ones with the disease.
193524
The thoughts on 'theraputic cloning' is to be able to fix a disease which has a genetic component (which is pretty much all of them) in patients.  Which is why the S Korean research was hailed as a breakthrough (and turned out not to be the case, but still an advancement).  The idea is to take stem cells from a patient, 'fix them' via DNA alterations, and put them back into the patient.  This avoids immunocompatibility questions.  \n\nThere is no medical purpose for creating complete clones of individuals, humans or otherwise.  For research purposes if we are trying to establish a new breed of animal which has particular characteristics, we can clone one animal and then interbreed it's cloned 'offspring', thus creating a breed of identical members.  It's important for research to find breeds which are genetically identical; it takes some 20 generations of interbreeding to get to this point.  If a species has a 2+ year breeding time, then it would take 40+ years to get to this point.  By cloning this goal can be achieved much quicker.  \n\nOrgan cloning is a separate area; the goal here is to generate human organs using tissue culture or animal models.  But the organs would have to be immunocompatible, ie grown from the same person.  No one in their right mind would clone human individuals for the sake of organ replacement.  You'd have to be some Nazi scientist or something like that.  It won't happen in the developed world any time soon.
883863
Depends what ones views with bioethics are. \n\nIf you're an evolutionist, the question shouldn't be "do you want to be cloned" but rather "should you be cloned"? Cos if you keep producing the same genetic material which is what you're essentially doing with cloning, how would that increase your survival as an organism in the wild?
630141
Many people disagree; some on religious grounds (against God's will), some on ethical/moral (somehow cloning is unnatural).  given that clones have same DNA they would have same immune system and thus be vulnerable to diseases that others might resist because of variations.
671971
I don't think it is as much bad, as it is unnecessary. A clone is a different person than the original. It would have a different personality and different memories and a different life. Who would want a look alike running around. The only purpose in a clone would be to farm body parts and that is WRONG.
106747
if you clone organs or whatever in purely medical purposes I`m all for it \nbut when you start talking about cloning people you like \ne.g. I like sting and I want one at home so he can sing to me  \nwell that`s crazy\nor deciding not to give birth but to clone yourself hello\nwhy not make a race of clones who will be superior to us because of their manipulated genetics \nI know tgis sounds like sf but cloning was also sf 15 years ago
271289
sure ....id love a cloned slave \n\nbut morally correct then no ....
834582
An entire human is cloned, but if you're asking if the brain will be the same in terms of the knowledge that it holds the answer is no.  Cloning makes a copy of genetics--the instructions that are stored as to how to make us physically.  The information our brains hold is all a matter of experiences encountered.  \nThis is a question of nature vs. nurture.  Our genetics do have implications as to how we think, but the way we are brought up, down to very minute details form who we are, and because it's very hard to mimic the same exact conditions that a person had growing up, it would be next to impossible to clone somebody who would think exactly like the original person.
1163027
It depends on the purpose the cloning is fulfilling. If we clone racehorses, we could have a bunch of Secretariats running against other Secretariats and their may be the demise of a great industry.\n\nHowever, if cloning, genetic engineering and selective reproduction have a well defined intent and the end result can benefit humankind, then let's do it. Not being a moralist, I would like to see science continue researching the distinct benefits all forms of reproduction have upon all of the species on the planet.\n\nThe protests that are being offered against artificial or any other form of selective reproduction, must be taken into consideration on a scientific basis and not offer up the old adage, "if God intended man to fly, He would have given him wings" in regards to reproduction.\n\nIn a day and age when it would be very wise to keep our religion and morals to ourselves, we should allow science to progress within reason and justification. In a nation that prides itself in a government 'of the people, by the people and for the people', I say, lets all be a part of the decision making process regarding sin and science and...\n\nGod help us toward that decision.
902333
It is entirely possible, however we are more than just the product of our genetic code, the clone would be a completely different individual. But although it possible, it is illegal to experiment with cloning of human beings. However, it is a matter of time before someone breaks that law if they have not done so already. Then again maybe they have done it in a country like China that in most instances would ignore international law.