Genetic Engineering

[Zet]

Is letting a child be born with a genetic disorder, that can be fixed with genetic engineering, humane?

yes it is humane

Genetic Engineering is one thing I agree with, but cloning? No way. It's just scary and cruel. We won't be using clones as equals, that's for sure.

wait, how is it scary and cruel? I mean like if a man goes to war and dies he could wish to have a clone so his family won't be crying over the loss

 

[Virtual Chatot]

You can't modify something that's already that matured.

Couldn't you just cut an arm off and sew it on to my chest? :>

wait, how is it scary and cruel? I mean like if a man goes to war and dies he could wish to have a clone so his family won't be crying over the loss

Couldn't we just send the clone to war? lolz

 

[Gymnotide]

yes it is humane


wait, how is it scary and cruel? I mean like if a man goes to war and dies he could wish to have a clone so his family won't be crying over the loss

"Humanly" more than "humane".

The clone would be a very different person from the original.

 

[Azonic]

You're relating this to removing an already-living person's mind.

If they never had it, then it's not so inhumane.
It's comparable to growing bacteria culture in a lab, except on a large scale.

Okay, removing a person's ability to live and experience life is definitely inhumane. A clone of a person makes it a person too; simple logic. And since that clone is human, that clone should be entitled to all the basic Human Rights.

Besides, if we were to leave a clone dormant for his / her whole life, the organs wouldn't be nearly as healthy enough to transfer.

Is letting a child be born with a genetic disorder, that can be fixed with genetic engineering, humane?

Yes. Fixing a gene could make another flaw in the child, anyways.

cannibals would approve of cloning humans, they need to survive as well and why clone animals? we can live off plants and such. In my opinion I would approve of genetic engineering in every way possible, we could live longer and crap

Just pointing out that there will be disasters before the miracle. First, they'd have to find out which genes control the life span (if any). Then, we'd still have the risk of fixing that gene and messing up another characteristic about the human.

yes it is humane


wait, how is it scary and cruel? I mean like if a man goes to war and dies he could wish to have a clone so his family won't be crying over the loss

The personality of a human isn't determined by genetics, and the clone won't get the same personality because a personality is determined by what one experiences. Would the clone get education, anyways? The clone will be completely different, aside from the physical appearance.

Also, scientific research tells us that the rate for a successful clone is between 0.01 - 3%. So for every 1000 clones, there could be only 1 useful / successful clone. That's a complete waste, not to mention the expenses involved.

 

[Spinor]

Couldn't you just cut an arm off and sew it on to my chest? :>
Couldn't we just send the clone to war? lolz

Spoiler:

That cup gives you an arm on your chest too!

First of all, I really don't care what happens with Genetic Engineering as long as it doesn't get to cloning humans.

However, and only if however, there was a way to clone and hibernate human organs for backup, then I would totally support that. Just not whole arms for Mac's abuse @~@

Animals have already been cloned. I remember the woman tha got cloned versions of her dog. I believe this could actually become a common service.

And for some reason, this thread reminds me of "The Island" XD.

 

[Milke]

Was this posted after watching Sunday's Family Guy? XD

I think cloning humans is wrong, but if animals, if cloned, could provide us with organs, why not?

 

[Yamikarasu]

I would be against cloning humans, it really does not serve any purpose. Once you clone a human and it is born, then you ask yourself why did you clone this child instead of producing one naturally? There are other ways for an infertile couple to have children.

However, I would support cloning if it was just to produce an embryo for stem cells. That is really the only benefit human cloning has.

Genetic Manipulation I would support only if we were to get rid of disorders like autism or down syndrome. Maybe we could work in a "natural" immunity to the HIV/AIDS virus, heck, maybe even cancer. But if the genetic manipulators were to go so far as to do something like "speed up" evolution, that is where I would draw the line, as we have no way of knowing what the consequences of a more intelligent/stronger/quicker human race would be. Also, it seems wrong to me for parents to be able to pick and choose what traits their children have, i.e., brown hair, blue eyes, enjoys soccer.

 

[Azonic]

Was this posted after watching Sunday's Family Guy? XD

I think cloning humans is wrong, but if animals, if cloned, could provide us with organs, why not?

It amuses me how you think we can rip out an animal's organs and put it in a human, so we can expect it to work perfectly fine. :/

Today we have organ donors, but there is one problem out there. If you take an organ from another person, then you'd have to take the rejection medicine for it. What makes you think cloning and animal will get us any further with this, lol?

I would be against cloning humans, it really does not serve any purpose. Once you clone a human and it is born, then you ask yourself why did you clone this child instead of producing one naturally? There are other ways for an infertile couple to have children.

However, I would support cloning if it was just to produce an embryo for stem cells. That is really the only benefit human cloning has.

Genetic Manipulation I would support only if we were to get rid of disorders like autism or down syndrome. Maybe we could work in a "natural" immunity to the HIV/AIDS virus, heck, maybe even cancer. But if the genetic manipulators were to go so far as to do something like "speed up" evolution, that is where I would draw the line, as we have no way of knowing what the consequences of a more intelligent/stronger/quicker human race would be. Also, it seems wrong to me for parents to be able to pick and choose what traits their children have, i.e., brown hair, blue eyes, enjoys soccer.

Just to clarify; the future genetic clinic in California won't offer how to chose one's interests, intelligence, etc. because they haven't figured out which gene it would be (I kind of doubt there is one).

 

[Gymnotide]

Before I get villain-ized anymore, let's get my viewpoints straight.

Disorder prevention - Yes. It facilitates living for the individual and his/her caretakers and prevents others from looking down on the person; allows them to live a "proper" life. With this, we also get the potential for wiping out inherited disorders (e.g. achondroplasia, sickle-cell, Huntington's, cystic fibrosis, Tay-Sach's, etc.). Although positive, I also agree that we need to study this more and uncover every possible mistake we can make to prevent messing up people's gene pools.

We could cure diabetes -_-

Superficial modifications - Let's not induce evolution, please. It might be acceptable for plants or stuff, though. Let's not create new species, though.

Animal cloning - Commercially, no. Just get a new dog. There are countless animals that are under the care of shelters worldwide and many being abandoned or mistreated. Shelters can't care for animals forever. Who cares if your old dog just died? The clone will only look like it. Scientifically, there may not even be a purpose, other than to prove it can be done. But after that, I don't think it has any practical use. It may be possible to revive extinct animals or repopulate endangered species, but that's just going against the laws of natural selection (lul, humans atoning for their sins).

Horticulture - Really I see nothing wrong with this, given the already quick proliferation of plants. We could create medicine or food from these developments. On that note, horticulture is one of my favorite words.

Human cloning - The clone will develop independently of the original, but will maintain its general appearance. imho, this is very creepy. Hell, you can't even expect to have a clone made in time because you'll always be a different age than it. Um, adoption comes first. There might be scientific purpose to test drugs, etc., but you'll all just criticize me and call me a radical.

Chimaeras - We could start a moral war with this. Again, I'm against creating new species. Ban this quick.

 

[blitzbear]

people were made the way they were for a reason adding bits and taking away unless a life nessesity is wrong if we were meant to be that we wed be born that way....the perfect human...wasnt that hitlers goal....as for food what affects will that have on humans and animals... we dont know...

yes and what about creating new species ...we could have the perfect soldier human mutany thing amagine how many wars that would start bad idea unless we are 100% cetrain we are ment to do this and as human we are never 100% certain of anything

 

[Penguin13]

Besides, if we were to leave a clone dormant for his / her whole life, the organs wouldn't be nearly as healthy enough to transfer.
Yes. Fixing a gene could make another flaw in the child, anyways.

... No it couldn't. Today's genetic scientists are very skilled and knowledgeable about genetics..

 

[the bitter end.]

How do you know this mr. Penguin?

Any who, it's certainly an interesting concept though a difficult one to achieve. Customization sounds VERY interesting...

All I can say is that it's interesting.

 

[Angela]

Genetic Engineering: The act of adjusting or duplicating one's genetic structure within one's DNA. Includes cloning and customizing the outcome of a child, plant, or animal.

What are your opinions on genetically engineering humans? Do you think it's right to customize your own child? Do you think it's right to clone a human?
​

Many believe that genetic engineering will help end a numerous amount of genetic diseases, like cancer. This will prevent such diseases from being passed down from one generation to another. However, it seems too good to be true... Repairing and eliminating one's susceptibility to cancer may introduce another flaw. If you replace a letter on the DNA strand, you may remove one's susceptibility to cancer but activate another flaw. So your child may not have cancer, but they might have 3 ears, or six fingers! This is because fixing a code on the DNA works in a domino effect (a gene fixed may cause another flaw, and that flaw can cause another, and another, and so on). Do you think it's worth the risk? What will happen to all the children with "accidents"?

Also onto the topic of cloning: Many support cloning because the clones can be used as test animals or servants. Others want clones to be back-ups in case an organ fails. Do you think this is humane?
~
Genetic engineering, I believe, has just far too many possibilities to ignore and just pass by. Genetically engineering plants with faster growing genes will increase the rate in which our natural plants grow, and increasing the number of foods out there. But we just shouldn't clone humans, in my opinion. :[

Anyways, the world is supposedly going forward with genetic engineering.

- Rumor has it that Korea has cloned a human (which I highly doubt).
- Numerous cloned animals have already been created, including Dolly.
- A couple in Florida purchased a cloned version of their deceased dog not too long ago for $155,000.
- A clinic in California is advertising that they will be offering services to customize the outcome of your child (e.g. If you want sandy blonde hair, you've got it!).

So what are your views? :>

Well I guess testing things like that cant hurt, and if the clone has a mind of it's own then yes growing them for there organs is inhuman.

 

[Azonic]

... No it couldn't. Today's genetic scientists are very skilled and knowledgeable about genetics..

lol... yes it can. If your statement was true and there would be no risk in genetic manipulation in a child, then this action would have been performed long ago without such debates. :|

 

[Starom]

I'm all for it.

As usual, people have jumped the gun on an issue like this. We don't need to become inhumane when it comes to genetic engineering. If it is a practise that is just as well regulated as, say, organ donation, there would be nothing to worry about. If a sterile couple wished to have a child of their own, finally, it could happen. And, the child, would be a genetic clone of a parent.

I think a lot of us feel that "clones" will be like the spooky sci-fi clones of 80s films - the reality is totally different. The clone would be born just like any other child and develop similarly. I somehow doubt that a parent would dress their child exactly as they dressed. I even doubt that, when they speak, they'd sound the same. Most of the traits of a human being are learned - not inherited - so they may go down a completely different route to the parent.

 

[Tokin]

Genetic Engineering: The act of adjusting or duplicating one's genetic structure within one's DNA. Includes cloning and customizing the outcome of a child, plant, or animal.

What are your opinions on genetically engineering humans? Do you think it's right to customize your own child? Do you think it's right to clone a human?
​

Many believe that genetic engineering will help end a numerous amount of genetic diseases, like cancer. This will prevent such diseases from being passed down from one generation to another. However, it seems too good to be true... Repairing and eliminating one's susceptibility to cancer may introduce another flaw. If you replace a letter on the DNA strand, you may remove one's susceptibility to cancer but activate another flaw. So your child may not have cancer, but they might have 3 ears, or six fingers! This is because fixing a code on the DNA works in a domino effect (a gene fixed may cause another flaw, and that flaw can cause another, and another, and so on). Do you think it's worth the risk? What will happen to all the children with "accidents"?

Also onto the topic of cloning: Many support cloning because the clones can be used as test animals or servants. Others want clones to be back-ups in case an organ fails. Do you think this is humane?
~
Genetic engineering, I believe, has just far too many possibilities to ignore and just pass by. Genetically engineering plants with faster growing genes will increase the rate in which our natural plants grow, and increasing the number of foods out there. But we just shouldn't clone humans, in my opinion. :[

Anyways, the world is supposedly going forward with genetic engineering.

- Rumor has it that Korea has cloned a human (which I highly doubt).
- Numerous cloned animals have already been created, including Dolly.
- A couple in Florida purchased a cloned version of their deceased dog not too long ago for $155,000.
- A clinic in California is advertising that they will be offering services to customize the outcome of your child (e.g. If you want sandy blonde hair, you've got it!).

So what are your views? :>

As for cloning: I do not oppose it, i simply creates people physically identical to their original counterparts, but completely different in all other respects, it's not so radical in my opinion.
Genetic enineering: depends on the ends, if used as medicine, I see nothing wong wth it, if used as a weapon, that' where the problems start
As for the "customize your child" thing, I don't see much wrong with the act itself, BUT, it could create a dangerous culture of aesthetic perfectionism, where those who can't be "customized" by their parents would be segregated.

 

[Azonic]

As for cloning: I do not oppose it, i simply creates people physically identical to their original counterparts, but completely different in all other respects, it's not so radical in my opinion.

And what would most likely be the outcome of those clones? They'll be used as slaves, testees, and / or sacks of organs. :/

 

[Tokin]

And what would most likely be the outcome of those clones? They'll be used as slaves, testees, and / or sacks of organs. :/

everything has the potential to be abused, as I said later in my post, I agree, it would be a controversial issue, but since most of us here can agree on "clone rights" it would likely not come to that, at least not legally