Debate discussion

Interesting idea, huh? What does everyone think about human cloning? It has never happened but scientists have been able to successfully clone a sheep. Any moral or ethical issues or is it cool and beneficial to the human race?

in my opinion DUMB...

It's retarded and won't work. Everyone would be the same and it's impossible to have the DNA live

true...i guess...ha ha ha my cat just fell it was funny...

It is theoretically possible, with enough advance of technology.

Plus, think about the growing organ donor list. Imagine, one donated organ could be cloned, and save a thousand. Isn' THAT worth pursuing?

"Everyone would be the same"

That is not the premise behind cloning.

"it's impossible to have the DNA live "

Citation please. :)

No Lauren. You don't deserve citation :P
Lol the citation is me.
Anyway, If you were to clone someone, how would you make the cells all the same to create the exact DNA? Hm?? and if you were able to do so, how long would the cells live. Also, do you have any idea how many tests you would have to do to make sure the organs live??

Em, sorry to say, but you (to my knowledge) are not an empirical source, and that could be nothing more then your opinion. And opinions are not valid points in a debate.

"If you were to clone someone, how would you make the cells all the same to create the exact DNA? Hm?? and if you were able to do so, how long would the cells live. Also, do you have any idea how many tests you would have to do to make sure the organs live??"

A) It's called they already cloned a sheep and it lived. Technology is improving all the time.
B) Well, if the number of tests is more important then the potential to save thousands of lives...science and medicine is nothing BUT testing. Any hope of shortening the donor waiting list should be pursued, for the sake of the people, every year, who die while waiting for organs.

Go Lauren~!

<3

don't worry emily they do that to me too...







"you never provide good resources, you are not a good source" things like that and then some one like j will have to add the unnessecary "go lauren"

I, unlike you, know Em personally. She is a biffer. <3

I don't single people out. I treat their evidence equally. Regardless of whether I know them or not.

i never said that i knew her at all...

eh, i'm alright. I'm stubborn so I fight. The only reason I have not replied to lauren's obnoxious comment is because I'm looking for something I had found a while ago to support my reasoning.

i am stubborn too...as you know by the fact that i have not left yet despite the fact lauren and masha/maria or people like them are annoying

Obnoxious? You wound me. I am not being mean, I am simply asking you to support your statement. A valid question in a debate.

When you find the link, I will be happy to read it.

mhmm i understand.

That is simply how I debate. <3

lol lauren

"Obnoxious? You wound me."

You know how I am :) and no offense but it kind of was.....................................<3

I've been called much worse things in my quest to make people get proof. <3

Yes, you are stubbornz. lol

Yes I am and damn proud of it :P lol

i wish i could wound you...

Me? A cutting remark is the best you can hope for, I'm afraid. :D

Emily wrote: "It's retarded and won't work. Everyone would be the same and it's impossible to have the DNA live"

First, scientists have already cloned many mammals including sheep.

Second, retarded is unkind to those who actually are retarded.

But I don't mean to be rude or nag it just really bugs me.

Sorry. I don't think of hurtful words actually hurting when I debate.

I was thinking we would debate more on the ethics of it all. We know every day scientists are working towards new advancements and eventually human cloning will work. What does everyone think about whether it is morally correct?

I believe it is morally wrong because God creates us and should be the only one with that right, not scientists. I also don't know how a medical and scientific reproduction of a human could house a soul and feel deep emotions, even if they had working systems.

From a scientific standpoint, the human brain is an ENORMOUSLY complex organ. There is no way to know if we could even clone it successfully.

"I also don't know how a medical and scientific reproduction of a human could house a soul and feel deep emotions, even if they had working systems."

That's why we must try, in the pursuit of knowledge. Even if it doesn't work out, we have still learned.

Emily wrote: "Sorry. I don't think of hurtful words actually hurting when I debate."

Totally fine. No worries!

But Lauren, I understand we should try, but do you think that if we succeed it is morally okay for humans to be creating humans as opposed to God creating humans? And would these clones have souls? CAn we really reproduce what God makes?

Well, get me a soul-meter, and we can measure if they have souls.

What do you define soul as?

Yah Aryll.
I define a soul as the part of a human that makes feeling and emotion, differentiates between right and wrong, has faiths and beliefs and loves.

Any more specific? Where is it? What exactly does it control? Why does it exist, when, through Occham's Razor, the brain is able to make a person's personality in chemical functions, and the soul as you put it is unnecessary?

Liz wrote: "Yah Aryll.
I define a soul as the part of a human that makes feeling and emotion, differentiates between right and wrong, has faiths and beliefs and loves."

Also known as the brain. Haaa.

Well then, if the brain does all that, why do you need the soul bit?

You are a dualist, I assume? Someone who believes the mind and body are two, not one?

what is the POINT of cloning anything? if scientists actually have that kind of time, why aren't they using it to do things that are ACTUALLY helpful? like solving pollution, cleaning the earth, inventing fuel substitutes!!! i know a lot of scientists doing that but why don't the ones that are playing around with DNA start doing things to save the human earth so that we will have the time to do silly DNA games later and NOT have thousands of people freaking out about fuel but of course not doing a goddamn thing about it!!

It will lead to reversing the aging process, heart attack treatment, human stem cells (creating new organs, which would solve organ failure & diseases), infertility treatment, curing cancer, and much more.

So do you honestly think cloning is pointless?

Lauren wrote: "Any more specific? Where is it? What exactly does it control? Why does it exist, when, through Occham's Razor, the brain is able to make a person's personality in chemical functions, and the soul a..."

It isn't physical or material. It is a spirit. It controls rightg and wrong in a more indepth way than a brain. It controls sin and pennance and love and trust and complex emotions. It is what decides if you are good or bad and whether you will go to heaven or hell. It is very different from the brain.

Though not everyone believes in that interpretation of a soul.

Why do we need to reverse the aging process?

My issue with cloning is that clones can never be real people. They can scientifically and genetically be people, but they can never have souls and I believe only God makes people.
Besides, how will we ever duplicate the amazingly complex human body that we still don't know everything about?

Thank you J.

"It is a spirit. It controls rightg and wrong in a more indepth way than a brain. It controls sin and pennance and love and trust and complex emotions."

The the frontal lobe does that! Without a soul there.

"Though not everyone believes in that interpretation of a soul. "

I'm just asking you, so I know how to debate you.

"Besides, how will we ever duplicate the amazingly complex human body that we still don't know everything about? "

Experimentation.

"Why do we need to reverse the aging process?"

That would not be for old people, but young people who are dying prematurely.

Liz wrote: "Why do we need to reverse the aging process?
"

I like how you only reply to the one point you had a comeback for. What about curing cancer or treating infertility? You can't possibly say those things are fine the way they are.

Nice point.

She can't deny the others, without seeming cruel.

J wrote: "Liz wrote: "Why do we need to reverse the aging process?
"

I like how you only reply to the one point you had a comeback for. What about curing cancer or treating infertility? You can't possibly s..."

I like how you only reply to the one you had a comeback for?Actually, I replied to three. And you can be a bit kinder don't you think? Both of you...

Lauren wrote: "Thank you J.

"It is a spirit. It controls rightg and wrong in a more indepth way than a brain. It controls sin and pennance and love and trust and complex emotions."

The the frontal lobe does th..."

I believe that a soul controls that and houses inner feelings, I believe the brain works and communicates but the soul is the root of it all.

I believe that reversing the aging process is not what we should be spending time on. Young people who are dying prematurely? They are dying from diseases and illnesses like HIV/AIDs and cancer. WE should spend time on that, but not "reversing the aging process" whatever that means.

I don't think creating unnatural human reproductions which can never be fully human is the way we should go about spending our time and money. I believe that would be better spent finding a more direct way to cure cancer and infertility. And actually, there are plenty of treatments for infertility such as IVF, medicines, and adoption.

My point is:
We can never recreate a human. They might have rough productions of the systems, but can never have a soul or feel emotions, which constitutes a medical prototype of a human, not an actual human. We don't know so many things about the human body, so how can we duplicate it? Isn't it immoral to try and create humans? Are we as a human race, too greedy? We have to find an explanation to everything and do it ourselves? Why are we spending our time trying to take over God's work? Are we having issues populating the planet? Are there not people who need homes already? Are we not already suffering with lack of resources, global health and pollution, and so many unexplained medical marvels? Why should we try and take over God's work when it clearly isn't our place to do so?

And if you are going to chide me about "only answering one of your points" I expect an answer for all of those. Not to be rude or anything, of course.

SOUL

–noun
1. the principle of life, feeling, thought, and action in humans, regarded as a distinct entity separate from the body, and commonly held to be separable in existence from the body; the spiritual part of humans as distinct from the physical part.
2. the spiritual part of humans regarded in its moral aspect, or as believed to survive death and be subject to happiness or misery in a life to come: arguing the immortality of the soul.
3. the disembodied spirit of a deceased person: He feared the soul of the deceased would haunt him.
4. the emotional part of human nature; the seat of the feelings or sentiments.
5. a human being; person.
6. high-mindedness; noble warmth of feeling, spirit or courage, etc.
7. the animating principle; the essential element or part of something.
8. the inspirer or moving spirit of some action, movement, etc.
9. the embodiment of some quality: He was the very soul of tact.
10. (initial capital letter) Christian Science. God; the divine source of all identity and individuality.
11. shared ethnic awareness and pride among black people, esp. black Americans.
12. deeply felt emotion, as conveyed or expressed by a performer or artist.

BRAIN

–noun
1. Anatomy, Zoology. the part of the central nervous system enclosed in the cranium of humans and other vertebrates, consisting of a soft, convoluted mass of gray and white matter and serving to control and coordinate the mental and physical actions.
2. Zoology. (in many invertebrates) a part of the nervous system more or less corresponding to the brain of vertebrates.
3. Sometimes, brains. (used with a plural verb) understanding; intellectual power; intelligence.
4. the brain as the center of thought, understanding, etc.; mind; intellect.
5. brains, Slang. a member of a group who is regarded as its intellectual leader or planner: The junior partner is the brains of the firm.
6. Informal. a very intelligent or brilliant person.

See the difference?

"I believe that would be better spent finding a more direct way to cure cancer and infertility"

Cloning one liver into thousands to save a thousand is the most direct way their is.

The dictionary saying the definition of a soul doesn't mean it exists. It has the definition of a ghost and the Loch Ness monster too. Do those exist too?

"We can never recreate a human. They might have rough productions of the systems, but can never have a soul or feel emotions, which constitutes a medical prototype of a human, not an actual human.'"

This sounds like "I'm might not like the result, so let's not try." There is no way to tell unless we try. If every was like "It MIGHT not work, let's not do it" we would still be in the Dark Ages.

No, cloning a liver isn't the best way to save lives because it will take hundreds and hundreds of years to figure out how to do it and then it will take thousands and thousands of years to figure out how to mass produce livers and make it efficient, when really we could just pinpoint the disease and spend our efforts curing that.

Oh, so your issue is not "define a soul" it is "souls do not exist". I don't know how to convince you of that because it is just my belief just like I cannot convince you there is a God and so on. So in your circumstance of not believing in souls, switch things around. Say we do have souls and they are what the definition says. What is your argument then?

Valid point there. But you still haven't answered my biggest and most repeated question; isn't it immoral for humans to try and take God's place in creation? And will we ever be able to make actual humans?

"hundreds and hundreds of years to figure out how to do it and then it will take thousands and thousands of years to figure out how to mass produce livers and make it efficient, when really we could just pinpoint the disease and spend our efforts curing that."

We have been able to clone a sheep, and DNA was DISCOVERED less the 60 years ago. Your guesses are way off.