I agree, George, but the business of using one person’s skin cells to make spermatozoa, would still be sexual reproduction with the continued new mix of genes. Only the y chromosome would be gone and replaced by another x chromosome.
The only legitimate ethical concern that I can think of is the matter of who takes care of the parentless child. Otherwise, this is a wonderful thing. Consider the technological possibilities for the future of medicine. Such potential for the preservation of life and the alleviation of suffering.
The only legitimate ethical concern that I can think of is the matter of who takes care of the parentless child. Otherwise, this is a wonderful thing. Consider the technological possibilities for the future of medicine. Such potential for the preservation of life and the alleviation of suffering.
I see a major ethical concern in the invitation to grotesque egotism. That applies to cloning babies, of course, not to the use of cells for medical purposes.
Yes. I’m not challenging your point. I’m just not sure what you mean. Are you suggesting egotistic motivations for he work of the scientists, or are you expressing fear that a parentless child will become a detached and non-social individual?
I guess I didn’t make myself clear with my future scenario where males wouldn’t be needed. One woman would contribute her skin cells which would be turned into sperm and used to fertilize her partner. The child born would have two parents, the woman who gave birth and the other woman, her partner, who contributed the skin cells.
So the little girl would be cared for in a regular two parent home, and I don’t see any egotistic movivations for women in a world without males using this method to procreate.
I wonder how fundamentalist Christians would react if we were able to make a clone of Jesus. You know, if they somehow had enough DNA from some sample found. If they refused to do so, invariably there would be (yet another) a split in the church because some Christians wouldn’t want to prevent the 2nd coming.
PLaClair, the baby may physically look like the person, but the personalities would not be the same. They would be as much alike as twins, for the most part. So what egotism?
I wonder how fundamentalist Christians would react if we were able to make a clone of Jesus. You know, if they somehow had enough DNA from some sample found. If they refused to do so, invariably there would be (yet another) a split in the church because some Christians wouldn’t want to prevent the 2nd coming.
Interesting scenario. Of couse, even if someone could find his remains the DNA would have been degraded enough after 2,000 years that it wouldn’t be cloneable. However, there was a Startrek TNG episode with this kind of basis. Some Klingon priests cloned their equivalent of Jesus, and brought him up, teaching him everything about their beliefs. He was led to believe he was the reincarnation, and it worked because everyone accepted him as their savior. However, when he was challenged and couldn’t do some of the things the original could, the whole charade broke down. (Mriana probably remembers his name.)
I could see some Christian priests trying the same thing.
Whilst I believe the cloning of humans should be tightly regulated on the basis that we are special (to us not in any spiritual sense) I have no issue with this at all and strongly believe that that the potential for the technology is mind-blowing. As Michio Kaku hinted at in his Quantum Visions series on BBC these kind of technologies could open the stars up for us ... even if humans can’t live on some planets, perhaps modified humans can.
Mind you, it looks like the Catholic Church will object ... [expletive deleted]!
I wonder how fundamentalist Christians would react if we were able to make a clone of Jesus. You know, if they somehow had enough DNA from some sample found. If they refused to do so, invariably there would be (yet another) a split in the church because some Christians wouldn’t want to prevent the 2nd coming.
If we had Jesus’s DNA, we could see that he had a father, a human father, not a beam of divine light. There would be no dispute if anybody should prevent the 2nd coming or not, as the DNA would prove that Jesus was indeed not a son of god to begin with, and Christianity could very much pack it in.
What you say, George, is reasonable, but that’s its flaw - the fundamentalists don’t use reason. Instead, they’d all be trying to figure out how to separate the chromosomes from the father so they could impregnate their women with the sperm of god.
Which of the multiple crosses, shrouds etc would you be extracting this DNA? Assuming this technology were possible I expect there would be multiple Jesi (plural for Jesus) to choose from, from various time periods.
Interesting scenario. Of couse, even if someone could find his remains the DNA would have been degraded enough after 2,000 years that it wouldn’t be cloneable.
Occam
Yes, but what if a mosquito bit him and was stuck in a drop of sap, the DNA quality might be good enough to create an island of Jesuses. I’d call it Jesus Park.
