Is human cloning legal in the United States?
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!
105787
It is legal in all states... the controversy is over government funding of stem cell research.
808174
Genetic modification is a dangerous game until the technology is absolutely fool-proof. \n\nI think cloning technology is the future since curing many diseases could depend upon it. But there has to be strict regulation involved because guess what, obtaining anyone's DNA is easier than picking your nose. \n\nYou may find the movie 'The Island' very interesting.
55395
Human cloning has long been a subject of speculation in science fiction. Science fiction speculation has included:\n\nthe use of cloning for "spare parts" for transplantation, typically with accelerated growth of the cloned parts \ntransferring one's mind into a younger clone body, as a way of achieving immortality \nclones somehow having a telepathic affinity for one another \nApart from the first, these ideas are currently pure speculation. (Telepathy has been reported by many indentical twins, for example seemingly unfounded anxiety of one twin, when the other who is far away is in trouble, or even more pronounced ESP, so the same could conceivably apply to artificial clones.
537397
Cloning is a method of reproduction used to copy a cell or an individual (producing a clone) from their DNA . Except when there are errors or mutations during copying, a clone is genetically identical to the original: it has the same DNA. In nature, certain non-sexual species, like bacteria, employ cloning for reproduction.
1106458
No, because cloning is a duplication of your DNA. So if your clone commits a crime, they may charge YOU for it because it's your DNA and they know it's yours!\n\nHowever, to clone plants and organs (like stem cells) would be ok because it would further our knowledge of science and benefit us. For example, cloning good crops would ensure that the crops would have the DNA that makes it grow well, and stem cells allow us to create organs that can save us in the case that we need an organ or something to be replaced.
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.
84942
Mostly fiction. When cloning technologies advance, humans eventualy will be able to be cloned, but not the way they show it on "the 6th say" - we won't be able to take a human body "template", "clone" it in the matter of minutes and install previous memories of the cloned individual. Normal scientific cloning, as we know it today, would generate a zygote, which would need to be implanted in a uterus and grow as a fetus. The newborn baby would have the same DNA as the cloned individual, so it would be an identical twin in a sense, but it will need to grow as a normal child to become an adult. The clone will have its own memories and probably a different personality, since it will be raised in a different environment than the DNA donor.
224688
People might have different views about cloning. But  if  organs are cloned for people who cant find any donors ,then its right and should be encouraged.But this technology should be handled with extra care, so that it may not get misused
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).
390860
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.
604997
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.
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?
941509
Cloning has given us the technology to take a nucleus out of one cell and place it in another cell.  It is now possible, for example, to take the nucleus out of a defective sperm (one that will not swim) and place it in a sperm that does, or to take a nucleus out of a defective egg (one that does not allow the sperm to penetrate) and place it in a good egg.  Then you could allow fertilization to happen in vitro and the resulting zygote would not be a clone of either parent; it would have half the DNA from mom and half from dad just like any normal baby.  \nMany times when they talk about human cloning they are not just talking about cloning a human organism; they are talking about cloning human cells.
628849
I'll assume you are talking about cloning of humans, and I'll assume you mean cloning that takes place in a laboratory, not the natural cloning that results in identical twins.  I don't think the idea itself is right or wrong, only the uses to which it is put.  If one clones a person to use as spare parts, of course that's abhorant to most of us.  If a person wanted to have a child exactly like themselves, then that might be a little odd, and maybe a bit warped for the kid, but I'm not sure it would be worse than the way a lot of kids are raised-and at least the parent would understand a lot about the kid.  But, I don't see much use in cloning..unless we as a society wished to clone some great genius, like Shakespeare or Newton, and DaVinci- I could see that as being exciting and possibly as useful to the society as a whole, but I'm not sure how badly that would interfer with the rights of child, and whether they would be happy with it, horrified, whatever...The young princes of England have to deal with constant media scrutiny and a lack of privacy, but nobody suggests the royal family shouldnt have children... It's complex-In the end, I don't think there will be enough of a positive possible outcome to really generate any excitement about doing it that would overcome our natural repulsion of the idea ("we" meaning Western society).  In other societies, though, the variable of the equation might be totally different than what we as Americans and Europeans might feel.\n*edit* I didnt even think about extinct animals- now that would be a *really* interesting debate, that would likely make for some very odd bedfellows and enemies!  Do we bring back the Dodo, the passenger pigeon? Or even the Mammoth?  That might very well generate enough societal excitement to actually get done, if it were possible..
1063767
memory has nothing to do with cloning. clones are legal humans, just with identical DNA as some one else. no your children wouldnt be the clones children, the clone is one persons DNA put into the womb of a woman, and then it gets birthed like any other baby. nothing is the same except the dna, and especially not the age, relatives, or memory.  of corse its murder to kill a clone, the clone would be a person just like you or I. clones don't even necessarily grow up to look the same as their parent clone.
1116848
Yes.  The ethical questions that this new technology raises are legion.\n\nhttp://www.dnaprint.com/welcome/productsandservices/anestrybydna/