Catsmeow Posted January 31, 2006 Group: Royal Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 439 Topics Per Day: 0.06 Content Count: 7,315 Content Per Day: 0.93 Reputation: 356 Days Won: 0 Joined: 11/21/2002 Status: Offline Share Posted January 31, 2006 hehehehe, I can't wait to see a soulless human being, a clone. That would just be awesome. To see him, and tell him he doesn't have a soul should be the most awesome freedom from fear there could be. We could set laws that make it mandatory to have babies only within test tubes and we could over 3 generations completely write God outta the picture. I used this as an example of what you are saying. Honestly, besides the lack of sex part, it sounds real good for mankind to me. matt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nebula Posted January 31, 2006 Group: Royal Member Followers: 10 Topic Count: 5,823 Topics Per Day: 0.75 Content Count: 45,870 Content Per Day: 5.92 Reputation: 1,897 Days Won: 83 Joined: 03/22/2003 Status: Offline Birthday: 11/19/1970 Share Posted January 31, 2006 Hmm . . . sounds like a great way to make a race of slaves. Don't you think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inti Posted January 31, 2006 Group: Nonbeliever Followers: 0 Topic Count: 4 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 132 Content Per Day: 0.02 Reputation: 0 Days Won: 0 Joined: 09/03/2005 Status: Offline Share Posted January 31, 2006 Lol EricH Cloning would be just badness, and wouldn't be human beings, as they wouldnt have a soul, remember God gave us the breath of life. So you're saying if someone cloned me, and you met the "original" and the clone (assuming the two clones where the same age) you could be able to tell which clone was which? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angels4u Posted February 2, 2006 Group: Worthy Ministers Followers: 55 Topic Count: 1,664 Topics Per Day: 0.20 Content Count: 19,764 Content Per Day: 2.37 Reputation: 12,164 Days Won: 28 Joined: 08/22/2001 Status: Offline Share Posted February 2, 2006 Matt, didn't you say before you don't have a soul? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angels4u Posted February 2, 2006 Group: Worthy Ministers Followers: 55 Topic Count: 1,664 Topics Per Day: 0.20 Content Count: 19,764 Content Per Day: 2.37 Reputation: 12,164 Days Won: 28 Joined: 08/22/2001 Status: Offline Share Posted February 2, 2006 Actual who creates life itself? If God would allow a clone to live I believe it would have a soul... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inti Posted February 2, 2006 Group: Nonbeliever Followers: 0 Topic Count: 4 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 132 Content Per Day: 0.02 Reputation: 0 Days Won: 0 Joined: 09/03/2005 Status: Offline Share Posted February 2, 2006 I am against cloning, God gives the breath of life, trying to clone, is just trying to play to try to be Him. If embryos are born by cloning, they will have no soul, theirfore haebv no true fealings. Hitler made similer arguments about Jews. it's funny how some things never change. Since clones don't have souls, what do you say to identicle twins? How do you decide which one has the soul and which one doesn't? Thats a good point, how about children concieved by artifical insemination. I.E test tube babies - ones conceived outside of a mother womb, are they Souless? They made up a small percentage of are current society. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OneGenesis Posted February 2, 2006 Group: Nonbeliever Followers: 0 Topic Count: 0 Topics Per Day: 0 Content Count: 6 Content Per Day: 0.00 Reputation: 0 Days Won: 0 Joined: 01/25/2006 Status: Offline Share Posted February 2, 2006 My main argument against cloning is that no thought seems to be given to where "life" comes from (at birth) - or goes (at death). I have not heard a scientist argue "Life, the ability of a being to sustain itself, is zapped out of the atmosphere, thus having no effect on humans as a species." And some, of course, believe that a child (new life) is a product of the union of a man & woman. If that's the case where does a clone get its spirit? I personally believe that we all have past lives. [bear with me here.] That we pass-over, are born again, are reborn into new lives (human) at death. Yes, suppose the billions of Hindus and Buddhists are correct and we pass over. [The "becoming insects theory", I believe, is a misunderstanding between cultures -- so don't go there... It all has to do with Science classifying Man as an Animal. So, if someone says to a, say, Hindu, "Does man pass over to an animal?", the Hindu says, "Yes"... Suddenly, the scientific definition of Man goes out the window, for some reason and the masses believe the passing over is strictly to four-legged creatures and insects. That's all the explaining I'll do on that.] BUT (back on the subject), suppose we become human beings again? Does cloning zap life from one human (prematurely) to give that Spirit to a clone? We don't know that it doesn't. [My beliefs, as to the Truth of Life and Scriptures, are a combination of many religions. For example, I believe ALL the Scriptures were written by the same person in different lifetimes. All things are possible! We kill so fast and recklessly that I believe Gays merely don't know which lifetime they're in -- they are in one body but have much the conscience of their previous life of the opposite sex. A lot of "mysteries" of Life can be explained by this theory. I won't get into all the aspects of my beliefs here...] We should consider ALL the possibilities ... and consequences ... before creating "life" even in petre dishes. That's my opinion!! OneGenesis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OneGenesis Posted February 2, 2006 Group: Nonbeliever Followers: 0 Topic Count: 0 Topics Per Day: 0 Content Count: 6 Content Per Day: 0.00 Reputation: 0 Days Won: 0 Joined: 01/25/2006 Status: Offline Share Posted February 2, 2006 "... then does it not follow that if a gifted scientist is able to clone a being from the cell of a human, then surely this must serve His purpose in some way." - GeneV. I just want to make the comment that the NT repeatly says that Man's knowledge is foolish. How should we define "gifted scientist" in that light? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nebula Posted February 2, 2006 Group: Royal Member Followers: 10 Topic Count: 5,823 Topics Per Day: 0.75 Content Count: 45,870 Content Per Day: 5.92 Reputation: 1,897 Days Won: 83 Joined: 03/22/2003 Status: Offline Birthday: 11/19/1970 Share Posted February 2, 2006 I like sci-fi. Sci-fi has explored the affects and after-affects of cloning. In all the programs I've seen so far, no consequences are grim. Now, one may argue that it's for making a good story. Maybe - but at least these writers show more thought to consequences than it seems scientists are. In Aliens IV I think it was, the Ripley clone walks into a room full of her clone rejects. The scene was gruesome - many, many groteque malformed versions of herself. At the end of the room, one malformed clone was still alive and begged the other version of herself, "Please kill me!" What would you do? In the book Starship Troopers - which is way better than the movie - one of the characters is one of many people who were birthed in a test tube environment. These people are treated as less than human by people born of mothers. This character not only has to deal with the attitude of others towards him but also his own conflict of his edentity. Even if you are an atheist, you should at least appreciate the psychological struggle a person would go through not having been born of father and mother. If you know anything of what children raised without a father have to struggle through (many of which end up in drugs, gangs, crime, etc.), you have to believe this would be a dire consequence. I'm all for research, but cloning is opening up a Pandora's box, no matter how you butter it up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest kayken Posted February 2, 2006 Share Posted February 2, 2006 Hello!! Just wanted to insert that cloning does not necessarily require the killing of another human being, embryonic or otherwise. If I understand it correctly, it involves the removal of a nucleus from the original organism (animal or human) and placing it into an ovum from which the haploid nucleus has been removed. It is then induced to begin division and differentiation into an embryo, etc. and etc. This is different from stem-cell research, in which donor embryos are "harvested" (I HATE that word - but haven't a better alternative) for diffferent "lines" to produce donor tissues for transplants. (In theory, anyway - I understand that the procedure has not been as successful as hoped.) I believe both cloning and embryonic stem-cell research are wrong, for Biblical and ethical reasons. It wrests a fundamental process of life from the guiding hands of an infinitely wise God and allows man to manipulate these seeds of humanity toward ends that may be helpful to some, but will be definitely detrimental to all (due to man's finite wisdom and potentially sinful ethics and motives.) I believe that all humans, whether conceived the original way or by in vitro. AI or cloning techniques, etc. I can't explain empirically how that happens, because the soul itself belongs to God and the dimension in which He operates. (The idea of proving its existence reminds me of accounts from the 19th or early 20th century in which bodies were weighed just before and after the moment of death to show existence of the soul having left a body and leaving a deficit in mass. It's very funny if you think about it.) The creation of life is a process which belongs to God alone. "Render unto God the things that are God's." We do otherwise at our peril. Sincerely - kayken Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts