|
Post by Vash on May 26, 2005 16:18:25 GMT -5
i was saying save the innocent animals by testing on human clones instead Hmm...that would work...but they are still humans and they have the same rights we do.
|
|
|
Post by chica on May 26, 2005 16:19:17 GMT -5
but they are clones and no they are just duplicates of humans so why can't we just experiment on them?
|
|
|
Post by Vash on May 26, 2005 16:52:55 GMT -5
but they are clones and no they are just duplicates of humans so why can't we just experiment on them? Because as soon as they are consious, thy will think different things than the original, all of the originals thoughts will be there, but now it can think different things because its life would be different, thus, can still change everyone elses lives in a complete different way.
|
|
|
Post by Lobstrosity on May 26, 2005 17:37:39 GMT -5
I know, but they are the same as the original right off the start. They react to any situation the same as the original would, but it depends on what new situations would be introduced to it.
You're right though, it will begin to think differently as soon as it gains it's own sense of being, which is why I only think we should test on it and stuff while it's still unconscious.
|
|
|
Post by Umbrafire on May 26, 2005 18:35:02 GMT -5
they are just duplicates of humans have you ever read The House Of The Scorpion? for those of you who haven't, it's about a boy who is the clone of a druglord, and everyone believes that the boy is different, somehow, but he is really human, just like the rest of us.
|
|
|
Post by Lobstrosity on May 26, 2005 18:36:37 GMT -5
Yeah, but that is still just a fictional story.
|
|
|
Post by chica on May 27, 2005 15:42:56 GMT -5
lol well what's the moral of the story?
|
|
|
Post by Vash on May 27, 2005 20:18:17 GMT -5
I'm thinking its something like even though you clone someone, the clone will still have a mind of its own, and thus a complete different person.
|
|
|
Post by Umbrafire on May 28, 2005 0:01:37 GMT -5
the point is, if you clone a sheep, wont the clone mind being killed just as much as the original? the same applies to humans.
|
|
|
Post by Lobstrosity on May 28, 2005 0:09:36 GMT -5
I don't care who minds being killed, thank you very much.
|
|
|
Post by KiddoFreak on May 28, 2005 0:52:34 GMT -5
Once more, I can relate an unwritten story to my beliefs. A lot like the House of The Scorpian, I suppose. It is anti-cloning, don't let it make you think I am too, it just has more meaning if I go with the conservative viewpoint (for once). Basicly, a human boy is cloned at birth, his clone immedietly placed into solitufe for scientific research. Since clones have no rights, unreasonable (or what is considered unreasonable) experimentaion is allowed. Now, a single scientist wanted to see if the human would develop the same wihtout outside contact (except for himself), and see what happened. So, this boy was kept in solitude for... I figured about 11 years. The original is in a car accident, and loses his arm. It is then that the clone is pulled out of study, and onto the operating table. His arm is taken off (without painkillers or good sedatives, he is just a clone after all) and given to his host child. Soon after, clone's rights protesters finally get a bill passed that makes clones legal human beings, meaning they need to be set free. The clone boy is then set loose in a world, without an arm, with no idea what to expect. The rest would pretty much be about him learning and finding identity and stuff. He might end up killing himself, I'm not completely sure. Anyhow, the moral of the story was based on my initial confusion of cloning: Are they actually people? Now, after learning more, I whole-heartedly agree with cloning, but only in humane conditions.
|
|
|
Post by chica on Jun 9, 2005 13:10:17 GMT -5
true I can see your point but still the arm was useful wasn't it? I mean it's just like donating organs only instead of realy humans to humans it's clones to their hosts. wouldn't that be better?
|
|
|
Post by Lobstrosity on Jun 9, 2005 14:40:14 GMT -5
A clone is still a person, but I know what you mean. I disagree though, because in this case the clone is not quite the same as the original, and that means it's really a different person.
|
|
|
Post by Umbrafire on Jun 9, 2005 21:01:13 GMT -5
true I can see your point but still the arm was useful wasn't it? I mean it's just like donating organs only instead of realy humans to humans it's clones to their hosts. wouldn't that be better? what if you woke up one day on an operating table, and some guy told you that you were a clone, and, just to let you know, he's about to cut off your arm with a circular saw in 5 4 3 2 1
|
|
|
Post by scifiqt on Jun 10, 2005 12:47:52 GMT -5
yeah, but in the example the kid had experienced any life; he was an experiment. You're putting it in the wrong context. We as a people aren't experiments. we have lives and experiences. And we are not studied in solitary confinement.
|
|