if you were a parent why wouldn't you clone your loved ones?
450694
1. Because it still wouldn't be the same... If you truly love your child they are irreplacable.\n2. Because science makes more trials than errors before they get it right do you want to take that chance?\n3. It defies human nature.  You don't fall in love with someone or love a child like they are an object.  And cloning simply creates an "object"\n\nGood Luck
172949
i would clone my girlfriend. twins, hehe
677675
We can clone people without sperm but it's impossible to clone people without a human egg. We don't need men to live but we do need women.
421475
Because of the way a cloned human being would have to be made they would not be identical. To create a clone they inseminate an egg with the DNA of the person they wish to clone until it begins to devide and grow. Then the embryo is implanted into a woman's womb. There would be some gentic difference due to the influence of the egg and womb that the child developed in.
68209
Two reasons\n\n1) In thier culture it is high priority to carry on the family name. Thus having more children would increase that possibility.\n\n2) Children are expected to take care of their parents in their old age. More children= more care.
297426
I love the idea. If you can't support a child, you can't have them. Sounds cold and logical.
779515
To build and establish a family of your own.  To  create a human being from your genes and to be a part of the society.
454887
The disadvantages is that something might go awry, your clone might commit a crime and the one being caught is you. The clone knows your secrets and might betray you, he knows your feelings and weaknesses and can overpower you. Human cloning also resembles the making of another person which is forbidden by some religions as only God can create lives, not men. If men clone, they are implying that they are omnipotent which they are not.
79394
To answer this properly, we would really have to define what is meant by cloning. To clone something is just to make a copy, and genes are cloned safely all the time. I think you mean making an individual who is a genetic copy of another individual.\n\nThis certainly hasn't been done often, and is in no way safe. Dolly the sheep died young and had problems, and I don't think it's completely understood yet why. There was a dog cloned in Korea, but now that researcher has been fired for publishing fraudulent data, even though they've checked out the dog and he does seem to be an actually clone. It still casts some doubt.\n\nThe idea of cloning humans is completely unethical at this point, because it is unsafe. At the current state of technology, you couldn't clone a human without producing probably hundreds of babies with birth defects in the process.\n\nHow long until it is safe? There's really no way to tell. If people were determined to do this (not sure why, there are much easier ways to have children), being able to do it safely will depend on discoveries that haven't been made yet, so there's really no way to predict. Could be 50 years, could be ten years if something really amazing happens in the meanwhile.
646712
Test tube babies are no different than cloning, I personally do not believe that God approves of either, but I do not condemn the babies born from "test tubes", I just wish man would stop trying to play God. If a man or woman is unable to have/father a child, there is always a purpose, look at how many adoptive parents abuse the children they adopt. I do not believe God approves but know of no actually chapters or verses in the bible to quote without looking them up.
256905
Actually the answer for cloning is also no. If we were to clone a human the baby would not grow in a lab. The embryo would still be implanted in to a women just like baby's being born via in vitro fertilization.
440931
The problem I have is with the cloning process.  Most clones fail or are deformed.  We cannot subject the clones to half-as_ed technology which might cause them to suffer.\n\nBut other than that, I don't see a problem with clones.
84942
Mostly fiction. When cloning technologies advance, humans eventualy will be able to be cloned, but not the way they show it on "the 6th say" - we won't be able to take a human body "template", "clone" it in the matter of minutes and install previous memories of the cloned individual. Normal scientific cloning, as we know it today, would generate a zygote, which would need to be implanted in a uterus and grow as a fetus. The newborn baby would have the same DNA as the cloned individual, so it would be an identical twin in a sense, but it will need to grow as a normal child to become an adult. The clone will have its own memories and probably a different personality, since it will be raised in a different environment than the DNA donor.
514686
If this were possible which it is not then what you would have is spontaneous cloning.  The offspring would not only be female it would be an exact duplicate of the mother.  There is no genetic material available in human females to reproduce anything other than a clone without fertilization.
177301
The offspring would be basically clones of the parent in DNA structure and appearance.
692270
One of the major problems with most transplant procedures is acceptibility. The patient's body recognizes the new organ as an intruder or threat, and attacks it.\nA cloned version of yourself would theoretically be a source of completely acceptable organs, since they are, in essence, your organs, genetically identical. Of course, you'd be killing another sentient being to harvest these organs, so there's the morality issue.\n\nHuman ingenuity has always been directed towards two opposite goals, saving lives, and destroying them. The other likely reason for cloning humans is for war. Identical soldiers, genetically modified to increase their physical prowess, dexterity with their weapon, and willingness to follow orders. Why send thousands of skilled laborers, with families and children, to their deaths when you can have a clone army grown specifically to be cannon fodder?\n\nI'm sure you could think of a few more reasons, if you really thought about it.
630141
Many people disagree; some on religious grounds (against God's will), some on ethical/moral (somehow cloning is unnatural).  given that clones have same DNA they would have same immune system and thus be vulnerable to diseases that others might resist because of variations.