Didn't you read the card?

I couldn't get past this. God gave us the tools to make and use nuclear weapons, do you suppose He wants us to? And then make ourselves extinct with them? I think not.

Does being given the tools to do all kinds of unspeakable horrors mean that we should do them, or that He wants us to? No. 

We are given tools to work with, it is our choice what we do with those tools.

As with most things, our God given tools can be used for good, or bad, free choice, a God given freedom.

It could be an axe.

God probably wants us to kill ourselves with those tools, because while only being here for .0059% of Earths history, we've managed to mess up everything else he's created. I'm not sure why he's waiting so long for the next mass extinction, so he can start over again.

And still...he does DX themes! Oh the unspeakable horror!!  Have we learned nothing? Is nothing sacred!? Sorry Jim....I just couldn't stop myself!

Sweeps month and nothing else was on TV I guess.

Funny...really...

The fact that you see two separate species as the same specie is kind of red-neckish, unless you mean that your more open minded and not racist ... however saying that a cloned thing would not have a soul ...

I believe that cloned beings also have a soul. Do you believe that animals don't have souls?

Also, upon your stance against cloning, it would seem that you are against cloning of ANY animals ... and cloning of most animals already happens on a day to day basis.

Saying that cloned people have no souls is like saying that In-vetro babies don't have souls, and that God has a very human-like plan that can be perceived and categorized as humans.

So yes, there is nothing wrong with your post ... but even though its freely thinking (neanderthals are people too!) it doesn't run against the red-neck archetype.

Ah...ok...well...no sense of humor today I guess. And people wonder why I'd never marry.

First we should clone a WOOLLY MAMMOTH in order to properly test cross-species MAGE. Then, if THAT works, maybe, from a purely data perspective, clone a Neanderthal.

Some dip-stick will suggest cloning Wacko Jacko because there's still some kids out there that haven't been chucked out a window.

Or Tiger Woods......why stop at 14 [or however many he got a leg over]?

absolutely.  we could use them as slaves and train them to hunt down all the illegal immigrants in this country.  tell them they can be "free" citizens when they've captured/killed 200 each.  after that, we can throw them in a sweatshop somewhere and make them manufacture cheap goods at .03 cents an hour.

clone on.

Very interesting post and responses.  The whole issue of cloning is interesting because it's already taking place.  I am no expert on this issue.  My opinion is that it will be dangerous to us as a species at some point and that there will be no ability to save ourselves because of some related issue(immune systems, diseases, etc.).  Maybe our scientist will make all the right decisions and no harm, no foul.  However, scientists tend to be just as ignorant as others in decision making processes.  The good, the bad and the ugly.  When scientists have decided for all of us because "they" know cloning is necessary, we as a species are probably doomed. 

My perspective can be changed.  Let me read and hear audibly from others(through broadcasting) how we absolutely need to clone vs. not for our continued existence and productive continuation of our species. 

Recently I watched a documentary on Hulu called The Future of Food.  It was interesting and scary at the same time.  A portion of which talks about cloning.  If you have not watched this, I think it is in your best interest to do so.  I do not have the required knowledge to make an evaluation of whether or not its conclusions are accurate but it should worry anyone who wants or has a family and concern for its long term growth.

I have no children and am not likely to have any.  If I did, I probably would get very angry at the whole cloning issue.  As it is, it makes for good conversation about likely outcomes or eventuality's regarding cloning.

I have yet to see a persuasive argument for cloning(can we not discover other methods for extending the quality of our lives?). 

Omnipotence, omniscience means that nothing happens that isn't part of your grand design. Nothing CAN happen that God didn't foresee , and didn't desire. Or he wouldn't have created creation in the first place. He created all this knowing exactly what man would do, and what would happen.

If God didn't want us to develop unspeakable horrors, we wouldn't be here. He would have created something different that COULDN'T develop unspeakable horrors.

Its just that His definition of unspeakable horror may not be the same as yours. If we are destined to become extinct, thats His will and we are simply the tools he's using to bring about it. He wanted us to have free will knowing EXACTLY what we would do with it.

So its up to us how and when we create life. I agree completely. Lets make sure we do it for the right reasons, and the right way.

Oh, good...as long as I don't believe he exists I'll be immortal...;)

If a bear shits in the woods.....

Wait....

that's a tree....

Yeah, well, God's will is indistinguishable from natural law at this point in the game.

Bravo Snowman and thanks for the chuckle. I think it is wrong to clone people. They also have the genome for Adolf Hitler, where do we draw the line? I also agree that the negatives will far outway the positives. What happens if they unknowingly release a pathogen that could have nefarious effects on present day humans. All it took was one blanket from the British and look how many Native Americans died form a pathogen passed on by the blanket.

I am also a bit religious and I think it is very WRONG to clone people, but it's funny how I can rationalize cloning human ears on pigs. There is a reason why they no longer exist through evolution. I think the energies used, and thet must be massive, could better be used elsewher. Something like trying to find cures for present diseases, like the HIV virus. Interesting subject though.

Exactly. If we start cloning people, then we'll create a superbug wipes us out.

IIRC, neanderthals are actually not another species, but rather a sub-species of human. So technically, they are still human. We just call them neanderthals because we like to think of ourselves as special.

Cloning humans is neither good nor bad; it just introduces a lot of moral ambiguity.

As for pathogens, that isn't an issue. Not for us at least. When you clone something based on DNA, it contains only the DNA of that organism, and does not come with bacteria/viruses/other nasties. If bychance DNA from said nasty contaminated the DNA attempting to be cloned, it would result in the death of the cloned organism rather than creating both a virus and an organism. One DNA = one organism. The problem would be for the cloned organism which would have very little defense against modern pathogens (with the defenses being less the farther back you go). Cloning long extinct animals would likely result in most of them dieing if not kept in a clean room their entire life. Then there is the issue of that organism's helpful bacteria. Without many species of bacteria, many complex organisms will get sick or at the very least not live as well as they otherwise would. These would not be brought in during the cloning process, and would themselves have to be brought in from a modern source, if one existed.

I'm pretty sure that this is disputed. i.e., there are a variety of different classification schemes, some of which list Neanderthals as a separate species and not a subspecies. But really, the whole classification system is a mess anyway, so the difference doesn't matter all that much.

I was taking the piss, and you went and spoiled my fun. 

I just want to point out (again I believe) that a clone of a person is not going to be the same individual. It's going to be like an identical twin born much later. Have you ever met identical twins? They very often behave completely differently from one another. There's much more to human behavior and individuality than simple DNA, a great deal of who we are is based on our experiences as we grow and how we react to them at the time. You could clone 50 Hitlers and they'd all behave very differently, none of them would be Adolf Hitler or anything similar to that monster outside of appearance and base intelligence.

I've all ready said no. 

The problem I feel is even given today's technology and it's advances that have allowed us to achieve many things the over riding factor is that we just do not have the capability or intelligence to be able to assure mankind that with cloning won't come some very horrible side effects.

Is it really worth it to find out?