View Single Post
Old July 19th, 2013 (6:46 PM).
twocows's Avatar
twocows twocows is offline
Mostly Benign
  • Gold Tier
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Michigan
Age: 27
Gender: Male
Nature: Lax
Posts: 4,202
Originally Posted by BlahISuck View Post
1) What do you think about creating a human-animal chimera? Is this breaking the "barriers" of nature? Or is the only barrier what human ingenuity cannot accomplish?
"Breaking the barriers of nature?" Who cares? This can help people. And it doesn't hurt anyone. I can understand if you (speaking generally, not at OP) have some sort of problem with it and you don't want to reap the benefits, but that's your problem and you should deal with it on your own terms, not try to make it into law that affects everyone.

2) I don't think this technique will be extended to humans, for obvious reasons. I can put that previous statement this way: these animals are being used quite simply because they are animals. Is this a step up from what we're used to in terms of using animals as resources? Would it make a difference if you harvested both the meat and the organs? Are animals more than things and are they being commodified too far? Does the need for organ transplants outweigh the ethics of using animals to harvest organs?
It's no different than using animals as food. I don't see any problem with it. Animals lack the mental capabilities that make us special as a species (except maybe dolphins, I've heard they're about as intelligent as early humans were). I don't think we should go out of our way to harm them and I don't think we should do anything that would hurt us in the long run environmentally, but using them as a means to save people is perfectly fine with me.

3) The United States is one of the most technologically advanced countries in the world - much of the high tech innovation going on still occurs there. This is no doubt on the cutting edge of the life sciences. Do you think such advances would be possible in the United States? Do the current political and social climate inhibit scientific development from occurring? If so, is this something worth changing?
I don't know. However, if there is such a barrier to scientific progress, it should be removed. This is a potentially life-saving advancement in science with zero human cost. Again, if a patient has an ethical problem with it, they should absolutely have the right to refuse organs from such a procedure, but the rest of us should be free to have access to such things.
Political Simulator
Reply With Quote