|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Tue May 05, 2009 11:21 pm
 |
|
|
 |
And if I say to you that I wanted to, know that I lied
to me, a clone is essentially just a twin- You experience different things, you grow different mentally, you're not the exact same person.
I suppose if humans ever did start creating a clone of everyone for scientific purposes, something would have to give. If their organs are for harvesting, if their purpose is for labour, there would have to be a division of the law for clone rights.
But that's the fastest way to ******** up the human race. Clones getting irritated with the natural-borns and just totally screwing over the world because they don't like living a life of slavery.
It would be like the days when negros were slaves, except it would be clones, and not judged on race.
In short: clones are a good idea theoretically, but in practicality, people are too moral to strip a thoughtful being of rights in any first world country, the world is overpopulated and we really don't have the ******** room for them.
You could be right |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue May 05, 2009 11:25 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue May 05, 2009 11:25 pm
|
|
|
|
Silver Screen black_wing_angel magmayoshi black_wing_angel HYPOTHETICAL QUESTION! Let's say we do clone humans. It happens everyday, and it's not surprising to walk by 5 copies of the same guy. Do these "clones" have "human rights", or are they basically just walking property? If they die, do we bury them, and give them a funeral, and all, or just send them to the incinerator? And how do we know who's the clone, and who's the real deal? Probably upon completion, branding in an easily seen area like on the neck would show someone to be a clone. Kinda like the life crystals on people in Logan's Run but more visible and only for clones. And people would probably be divided on whether the clones have rights for the same reasons there is division on a lot of things today. But what if a REAL person decided to brand himself, to avoid debts owed by "the real him". The clone wouldn't be resposible for them, so if they think he's a clone, he owes nothing. It's like faking your death, but easier. Then he is branding himself as a "lesser person," assuming this is a dystopian society, which would leave him subject to organ-harvesting, medical testing, or simple disposal of all similar clones if a defect was spotted or the original was gone, thus rendering such clones unnecessary. I think I'd rather just actually be dead than feign it. eek
Agreed 3nodding
I assume with the ability to clone with such exactness and with the ability to age faster and simulate memories for it, we could easily manipulate a random clones DNA to harvest organs to match a recipient. Or if not clones would just be killed off, with their organs sold on the black market to regular people for cheap, no one cares if lesser people die (and police don't take theft that seriously). And THAT'S the brighter side 3nodding
We haven't mentioned anything about slavery or mad scientisty "let's stick that to that" or anything else that would just plain suck on another level yet.
Remember you're a lesser person in said situation, people aren't wasting perfectly good pain killers on a CLONE. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 pm
|
black_wing_angel Vice Captain
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue May 05, 2009 11:39 pm
|
|
|
|
black_wing_angel Yoshpet Taking advantage of clones for reaping organs or slavery is about as ethical as doing it to their naturally born counterparts. They are still humans and they deserve the same civil rights that everyone is ensured. Hey, if marriage can be defined as "between man and woman" than humanity can be defined as "having been born from incubation in a woman's uterus. Ergo, they would NOT be humans. Just humaniod cattle. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue May 05, 2009 11:41 pm
|
|
|
|
Fresnel black_wing_angel Yoshpet Taking advantage of clones for reaping organs or slavery is about as ethical as doing it to their naturally born counterparts. They are still humans and they deserve the same civil rights that everyone is ensured. Hey, if marriage can be defined as "between man and woman" than humanity can be defined as "having been born from incubation in a woman's uterus. Ergo, they would NOT be humans. Just humaniod cattle. You assume clones are tank-born. The most reliable and efficient form of cloning involves in-vitro fertilization.
To date but that's with our current limited knowledge and idiots preventing progress. |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
black_wing_angel Vice Captain
|
Posted: Tue May 05, 2009 11:45 pm
|
|
|
|
Fresnel black_wing_angel Yoshpet Taking advantage of clones for reaping organs or slavery is about as ethical as doing it to their naturally born counterparts. They are still humans and they deserve the same civil rights that everyone is ensured. Hey, if marriage can be defined as "between man and woman" than humanity can be defined as "having been born from incubation in a woman's uterus. Ergo, they would NOT be humans. Just humaniod cattle. You assume clones are tank-born. The most reliable and efficient form of cloning involves in-vitro fertilization.
Well, I was just using an example. The point is that they'd find some "definition" that lessens clones to subhuman status.
Blacks suffered it, gays suffer it, and clones will suffer it. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue May 05, 2009 11:47 pm
|
|
|
|
black_wing_angel Fresnel black_wing_angel Yoshpet Taking advantage of clones for reaping organs or slavery is about as ethical as doing it to their naturally born counterparts. They are still humans and they deserve the same civil rights that everyone is ensured. Hey, if marriage can be defined as "between man and woman" than humanity can be defined as "having been born from incubation in a woman's uterus. Ergo, they would NOT be humans. Just humaniod cattle. You assume clones are tank-born. The most reliable and efficient form of cloning involves in-vitro fertilization. Well, I was just using an example. The point is that they'd find some "definition" that lessens clones to subhuman status. Blacks suffered it, gays suffer it, and clones will suffer it. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue May 05, 2009 11:49 pm
|
|
|
|
Kats Scratches
And if I say to you that I wanted to, know that I lied
the world is overpopulated and we really don't have the ******** room for them.
You could be right
What if they were kept in institutions and kept frozen until they were needed?
Quote: We haven't mentioned anything about slavery
I was going to but kinda forgot, I guess. I briefly mentioned the story that my mate was doing that kind of covered slavery conditions I guess...
I mean obviously enslaving people, clones or not, is ridic. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue May 05, 2009 11:50 pm
|
|
|
|
magmayoshi Fresnel black_wing_angel Yoshpet Taking advantage of clones for reaping organs or slavery is about as ethical as doing it to their naturally born counterparts. They are still humans and they deserve the same civil rights that everyone is ensured. Hey, if marriage can be defined as "between man and woman" than humanity can be defined as "having been born from incubation in a woman's uterus. Ergo, they would NOT be humans. Just humaniod cattle. You assume clones are tank-born. The most reliable and efficient form of cloning involves in-vitro fertilization. To date but that's with our current limited knowledge and idiots preventing progress. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed May 06, 2009 12:12 am
|
|
|
|
Fresnel magmayoshi Fresnel black_wing_angel Yoshpet Taking advantage of clones for reaping organs or slavery is about as ethical as doing it to their naturally born counterparts. They are still humans and they deserve the same civil rights that everyone is ensured. Hey, if marriage can be defined as "between man and woman" than humanity can be defined as "having been born from incubation in a woman's uterus. Ergo, they would NOT be humans. Just humaniod cattle. You assume clones are tank-born. The most reliable and efficient form of cloning involves in-vitro fertilization. To date but that's with our current limited knowledge and idiots preventing progress. Ehhh... I dunno. In vitro is certainly easier and more reliable than any incubation tank we have now, and it probably will be for a good long time.
But we're talking mass production. I think we'll take 9/10 failing over having to keep all the surrogate mothers alive as well in a tank for pregnancy period, which wastes more resources. We'll get it down pact into a beautifully exact process eventually, until then we flush the rejects like fish. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed May 06, 2009 12:33 am
|
|
|
|
Fresnel black_wing_angel Fresnel black_wing_angel Yoshpet Taking advantage of clones for reaping organs or slavery is about as ethical as doing it to their naturally born counterparts. They are still humans and they deserve the same civil rights that everyone is ensured. Hey, if marriage can be defined as "between man and woman" than humanity can be defined as "having been born from incubation in a woman's uterus. Ergo, they would NOT be humans. Just humaniod cattle. You assume clones are tank-born. The most reliable and efficient form of cloning involves in-vitro fertilization. Well, I was just using an example. The point is that they'd find some "definition" that lessens clones to subhuman status. Blacks suffered it, gays suffer it, and clones will suffer it. It'd be tough to alienate clones without catching twins in the crossfire. Identical twins are, for all intents and purposes, clones of each other.
"Twins clause", enough said. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
black_wing_angel Vice Captain
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
black_wing_angel Vice Captain
|
Posted: Wed May 06, 2009 12:50 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed May 06, 2009 12:56 am
|
|
|
|
magmayoshi Fresnel magmayoshi Fresnel black_wing_angel Yoshpet Taking advantage of clones for reaping organs or slavery is about as ethical as doing it to their naturally born counterparts. They are still humans and they deserve the same civil rights that everyone is ensured. Hey, if marriage can be defined as "between man and woman" than humanity can be defined as "having been born from incubation in a woman's uterus. Ergo, they would NOT be humans. Just humaniod cattle. You assume clones are tank-born. The most reliable and efficient form of cloning involves in-vitro fertilization. To date but that's with our current limited knowledge and idiots preventing progress. Ehhh... I dunno. In vitro is certainly easier and more reliable than any incubation tank we have now, and it probably will be for a good long time. But we're talking mass production. I think we'll take 9/10 failing over having to keep all the surrogate mothers alive as well in a tank for pregnancy period, which wastes more resources. We'll get it down pact into a beautifully exact process eventually, until then we flush the rejects like fish. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed May 06, 2009 12:58 am
|
|
|
|
black_wing_angel Fresnel black_wing_angel Fresnel black_wing_angel Hey, if marriage can be defined as "between man and woman" than humanity can be defined as "having been born from incubation in a woman's uterus. Ergo, they would NOT be humans. Just humaniod cattle. You assume clones are tank-born. The most reliable and efficient form of cloning involves in-vitro fertilization. Well, I was just using an example. The point is that they'd find some "definition" that lessens clones to subhuman status. Blacks suffered it, gays suffer it, and clones will suffer it. It'd be tough to alienate clones without catching twins in the crossfire. Identical twins are, for all intents and purposes, clones of each other. "Twins clause", enough said.
Quote: If you have sex with your clone, is that technically masturbation? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
