🚀 go-pugleaf

Cloning is banned because women can reproduce with a man through 
cloning.


Fabrikant wrote:
> 
> Savard jsavard@ecn.ab.ca wrote:
> >       The difference is that we're keeping someone alive who has a
> problem, not inflicting a
> >       problem on someone by deliberately bringing that person into
> existence in an unsafe
> >       manner.
> 
> The difference is only in our imagination.  Here is one situation: a
> pregnant woman is told that her baby is severely deformed and will die
> soon after birth.  You continue to support her, if she chooses not to
> abort the foetus.  This is moral, because it conforms to your
> definition of "keeping someone alive who has a problem".  Second
> situation: you have an embryo in a dish and a woman wants it to be
> implanted in her womb, and you can not refuse, because again, it is
> the case of "keeping someone alive who has a problem".  If you do not
> implant an embryo, it will die.  Now, the question is: can you or
> should you refuse to implant the embryo, if you know that it is
> defective?  Using your own logic, you can not refuse.
> 
> Now about cloning.  There is no doubt, that there is a risk of
> creating a severely defective child, but the same risk exists for any
> woman over 40, as well as those, who are known to have defective
> genes.  Would you forbid mentally retarded to procreate?  It is almost
> sure that their children will be defective.  This country has quite a
> shameful history of forced sterilizations.
> 
> All medical innovations are inherently risky.  The first heart
> transplant recipient lived just several days. There is no doubt that
> his life was shortened by this transplant, but this procedure paved
> the way to many others, and now thousands people are saved every year.
> 
> We allow killing of millions perfectly healthy foetuses every year
> (abortion), and if this is moral, why is it immoral to kill a
> defective one?  It does not really make any moral difference, that the
> scientists have created the foetus.  The killing of the foetus is
> either legal or it is illegal, regardless of how it was created.  Here
> is my understanding of the situation.  Any human cell (egg,
> spermatozoa, etc.) is the property of the person from whom it was
> taken, and this person can do with it whatever he wants.  This right
> of property continues until this cell (or group of cells, including
> foetus) can survive on its own.  From the moment it can survive on its
> own, it becomes a separate human being and has full protection of the
> law.
> 
> The cloning will and should proceed.  It will be unsuccessful at the
> beginning, as everything new in human innovations, but it will be
> perfected, and it will become as normal, as in-vitro fertilisation is
> now.
> 
> Fabrikant
> 
> P.S. If you wish to see more material written by me, send an E-mail to
> hollyric@colba.net, and you will be given the name of my web site on
> the condition that you do not post it.  If you have doubts about the
> authenticity of any posting, send your inquiry to the same address,
> and you will get a confirmation or a denial.

-- 
- Outlaw Frog Raper -
Schenectady Copwatch
(518) 356-4238