Cloning as a "Reproductive Right" Liberals?

[GRUNHERZ]

Hello liberals!

In a few years when the whacko leftist femininsts who often set the liberal agenda on such things begin demanding cloning as a "Reproductive Right", and we all know they will, will you liberals support the idea?

Lets hear it lefties!!!

[Sandman]

I'll bite.

If someone wants to clone themself, I don't care.

[Cobra]

I think I'll call him Mini-Me.

Mini-Me, you complete me.

Cobra

[Sandman]

CLONE OF MY OWN (to Home on the Range)

Oh, give me a clone
Of my own flesh and bone
With the Y chromosome changed to X.
And when she is grown,
My very own clone,
We'll be of the opposite sex.

Chorus:
Clone, clone of my own,
With the Y chromosome changed to X.
And when we're alone,
Since her mind is my own,
She'll be thinking of nothing but sex.

[Fishu]

Sandman has created a whole new meaning for "go diddly yourself"

[10Bears]

Designer babies? ones you could manipulate eye color, hair color, IQ level, resistant of diseases? Sure, I�m all for it.

Question is: Why would you be against that?

[GRUNHERZ]

I'm talking about cloning. Not DNA by numbers designer babies, which could be really cool, a sort of modern twist on eugenics.  But I imagine the real leftists would be against designer babies - at least those purchased by wealthy capitalist type individuals. Imagine the horror if somebody wanted a thin/phsically fit, tall, healthy (non cripple), visually abled, hearing abled,  intelligent, socially apt, blue eyed, blond haired, white, male, heterosexual baby. Did I cover the opposite of every current specially protected group?  Horrible!!!

Anyway lets hear about cloning. It is currently illegal in the USA, so will the whacko feminist movement declare this the next cherished female "Reproductive Right"?  And will the liberals come out in support?

[10Bears]

Sorry Grun  misunderstood your question.

Stem cell research which is kind of a tie in to cloning, is opposed by the Christen right on account of they don�t want anybody fiddling with God�s will. If the fems are on the side of the Christians I didn�t know that.

If part of reproduction rights mean you can clone an army of supermen, I�m all for it!. It can only benefit society to have healthier smarter people.

If other countries are already researching stem cell and cloning, I say we get on that bus.
WAaaaa an issue we agree on?... no ways.

[-dead-]

Send in the clones!

Why not? The clone won't be exactly the same person - won't think the same, like the same stuff. They'd just be genetically the same, exactly like [] identical twins (nothing wrong with identical twins is there?).
What's the big deal? If you want one, buy one.
Though why anyone would want a clone is beyond me: The only thing I can think of is it'd be perfect for organ transplants, but only if you don't mind murdering/mutilating your twin. For that sort of stuff, mucking about with stem cells is much more ethical and probably much faster and cheaper.
Which makes cloning expensive, compared to good old fashioned sex; less exciting than sex; and a bad evolutionary strategy - ie your clone is every bit at risk of dying from whatever diseases you're genetically at risk from. In short - purely a "we did it" kind of achievement, where the end result serves very little purpose, although the techniques learnt may be of benefit.
To clone an army of supermen - you need a superman to clone first. That you have to get through designer babies.

[GRUNHERZ]

I fully support stem cell research and religious type opposition is ridiculous to me. The potential benefits to all people are stunning.

[Eagler]

yeah, lets let the ones screaming for the removal of God play god

[Lance]

Heh, just think of it as an opportunity, Grun.  When the liberals get it passed, the next time the conservatives take control, they can push for deregulation of the cloning industry so that parents can ensure their kids are born conservative, heterosexual and with an unshakable belief in the allmighty.

[Kieran]

Oh, the irony, Lance!

I have a religious objection to it, no doubt. I also have grave questions about whether we know enough about it to go mucking about.

I find it distasteful where the demarcation of "life" begins for the liberal mindset. "Pro-choice"? Pro-death! What happens if you clone something that doesn't meet your standards? Does it get destroyed? Is it an "it" or "he/she", and when does that distinction take place?

Will I have to be party to funding such efforts through my tax dollars? I am vigorously against such research, and would want no party to it.

I think it is pretty arrogant to think we could make perfect "people" when we can't even cure the common cold.

[miko2d]

-dead-: Send in the clones! Why not? The clone won't be exactly the same person - won't think the same, like the same stuff. They'd just be genetically the same, exactly like [] identical twins
 Identical twins - even those raised separately think substantially the same and like the same stuff - foods, activities, mates, etc. But why would it be a problem even if a clone is exactly the same person?

Though why anyone would want a clone is beyond me: The only thing I can think of is it'd be perfect for organ transplants,
 From the nature's standpoint the clone is you. There are quite logical reasons why someone would want to raise a baby genetically identical to him/herself.

The only thing I can think of is it'd be perfect for organ transplants, but only if you don't mind murdering/mutilating your twin. For that sort of stuff, mucking about with stem cells is much more ethical and probably much faster and cheaper.
 Quite the opposite - a rational man without complexes (like me) would say - "I have a clone - so there is another 'me' living on this Earth. Now I can die without wasting money on prolonging my decay. Rather I would leave whatever wealth and accumulated experience to me/him". We are already way past absurd in wasting resources on life-supporting elderly corpses. If you love someone that much, make a clone and turn off the switch.

and a bad evolutionary strategy - ie your clone is every bit at risk of dying from whatever diseases you're genetically at risk from.
 As are your children - they will inherit the same genes.

In short - purely a "we did it" kind of achievement, where the end result serves very little purpose, although the techniques learnt may be of benefit.
 It is another hot issue on which a consensus will never be reached. For you it's a curious tidbit of knowlege - like christians' silly concern about their hypothetical 'immortal souls', but for some it's a real way to personal immortality.

Eagler: yeah, lets let the ones screaming for the removal of God play god
 Removal of what? Play who? Oh, right... I cannot talk for others, but I would never 'scream' for removal of God had one existed. I just want to keep silly superstisions our of public schools, that's all.

Kieran: Will I have to be party to funding such efforts through my tax dollars? I am vigorously against such research, and would want no party to it.
 Exellent point. I am too vigoroulsy against my tax dollars being used on research and support of people 'living' way past their God/nature intended time. Government should not fund any kind of research other than military.

 miko

[Eagler]

Ego??