What are your views on cloning?
445927
i wish i can be clone, so my legacy can continuously affect all mankind for goodness. \n\nit's not that all my friends wants every parts of me, some women wants my legs, my boobs, my derriere, my hair, but some guys wants my brains and some wants everything i represents. i don't mean no harm or bad or anything but all the people who knows me, wanted my species to go on. i pray all the time, i help needy people as much as i can, i value all human being, i care and i love everyone.  \n\nby the way, i'm an aquarian so check out their qualities, that is my plus sign as well.
532744
Why not? It wud be a dream come true if it so happens.I love myself so much that sooooooo many people love me and I being just one person ,cnt be with all,so if can be cloned shall get made many copies,one as a gud humanbeing to serve the world,second to be with my family and friends,third to live my fantacies,fourth to be a political figure to bring chage in the society,fifth to be a teacher to learn and teach the children,sixth to be an innocent child to just play n play,seventh to be....oh!I can go on and on.
879526
That is the why human cloning is banned.Because it is more unbenefiatiable.The main thing why this is if this is possible, then a criminal would be clonned in many and you can imagine what the situation would be  if a most criminal person is clonned many.there are many bad thigs than good things about human cloning.But cloning of some parts of human organ or themselves should be done because this would help patients to get new fresh organ.
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.
110014
1)Cloning isn’t very successful. Currently scientists have to attempt to produce hundreds of clones just to get one success. The rest of the clones either resulting a spontaneous abortion or else are deformed deformed and die or are euthanased shortly after birth. Obviously we can’t ethically apply such a technique to human babies, even if we could find women willing to carry children with a high probability of miscarriage or being born deformed.\n\n2)It’s a worthless exercise. Genetics is only a small part of  what makes someone intelligent. Environmental effects such as diet, childhood stimulation, education and upbringing are far more important.  Even if we could clone Einstein we almost certainly wouldn’t end up with anyone of any great ability.\n\n3)It’s ethically and legally impossible. Einstein gave consent for organ harvesting, he never gave consent to being cloned. You simply can’t do this legally, which means it could only possibly be achieved by a Mad Doctor, possibly using a lightning rod. Possibly working a a castle on a high peak in Transylvania. Necessarily with an assistant named Igor.\n\n4)It’s physically impossible, at least with modern technology. Cloning requires live cells. Al has been dead for some time. Even if technology reaches appoint where we can clone animals form dead cells we still won’t be able to use remains that have been pickled in formaldehyde like Al because formaldehyde destroys DNA. Maybe in another 50 years or so we will have the technology tot allow use to reconstitute shattered DNA, but not today.
103356
Hi there, \n\nYou are absolutely right. It is likely that Human Cloning will be accepted in the future. Just think of it...Wouldn't it be wonderful to clone persons like Einstein, Socrates, and other great people who have influenced this world? \n\nBut I think there must be restrictions on whom to clone. If not, the population of this world will rise rapidly. Also, it will give rise to unnecessary chaos and disorder regarding who is who. \n\nAnd I also think the technology should be known to a limited number of scientists, because there is a likely chance of illegal cloning (as in the movie 'The Sixth Day')\nIf every person gets to know the technology, he can take the creation into his own hands, and so all the unethical things are likely to happen. \n\nSo, on the whole, Human Cloning isn't a bad idea, provided there are 'proper' laws made and 'implemented', and people think rationally.\n\nrule wid style n luv@vinny\n\nEdit: Well, I do agree with you that a lot depends on the society and the brought-up of the person, but I was just trying to bring out a point there. I needed an example thats it. I completely agree with you.
28455
Disadvantages: People will deem clones to have no souls and use them in immoral ways.\n\nAdvantages: None.\n\nI can see no benefit to the actual cloning of a human being. The benefit comes from the knowledge gained from cloning. Once we have the ability to clone a human being, we can specialize in cloning just the parts that we need.\n\nImagine a person with lungs and a heart damaged from disease or an accident. Doctors can clone just the heart and lungs from the patient's own DNA and transplant them. No waiting for donors and no organ rejection.\n\nHow about cloning gallons of untainted blood as needed? No more need for donors, storage, or disease testing. Even rare blood types can be cloned as needed.
281261
I think a great deal more needs to be done in animal cloning before humans get involved. Besides the ethical issues, there are real physiological difficulties that seem to erupt in cloned organisms. It seems that having two sets of genetic material really is important.
1031751
Clone Problem\n\nWith the advances in cloning I presume humans shall be next. \n\nThis brings us to the BIG question. If you push your naked clone off the top of a tall building, would it be? \n\nA) Murder? \n\nB) Suicide?  \n\nC) Merely making an obscene clone fall?
689574
Pros: \n\n1. Advancing the cause and understanding of cloning science.\n2. Creating new resources.\n3. Restoring a lost species to the world.\n4. The opportunity to learn about a lost species first-hand.\n5. Fame.\n\nCons:\n\n1. The potential to wreak havoc with an ecosystem that has adapted to the absence of the creature.\n2. The potential for the introduction of a new virus or germ.\n3. Bringing another animal into a world where people are wiping them out wholesale.\n4. Religious protest.\n5. Jurassic Park 4.
3240
Cloning is the process of creating an identical copy of an original. A clone in the biological sense, therefore, is a single cell (like bacteria, lymphocytes etc.) or multi-cellular organism that is genetically identical to another living organism. Sometimes this can refer to "natural" clones made either when an organism reproduces asexually or when two genetically identical individuals are produced by accident (as with identical twins), but in common parlance the clone is an identical copy by some conscious design.
823360
Well....cloning is just making out a genetically identical individual from an individual. To begin cloning is of two types..natural and artificial...Natural is the one which happens in nature by mitosis in eukaryotes and binary fission in prokaryotes...you can give tonnes and tonnes of examples for this(anything identical to another thing is a clone of tht 'another' thing........i can even say that DNA replication is cloninf of the original DNA molecule....thus cloning can be a broad term but here i m jus tellin you about cloning of organisms or cells). Artificial cloning methods are the ones which humans use for various reasons(wich are not ethical) Artificial cloning would include tissue culture, embryo cloning, tranferring a diploid nucleus to an egg cell to get an identical organism(as in case of Dolly the sheep), etc., and etc.,  so you can devide cloning into many types....................................
469349
The cloning of animals, while promising, has many problems that would need to be adressed before the cloning process would be more effective than simply breeding the animals. A surprisingly low success rate of creating clones, along with the possibility of genetic defects being passed on and the expensive equipment required to perform these processes are large deterrents to cloning in today's world.\n   \n   The famous sheep, Dolly, was one out of numerous attempts to clone a single sheep.  Creating multiple clones would require either an enormous amount of equipment or an improvement on current methods to prevent only a small population of clones successfully being created.  In addition, any flaws in methods used could result in genetic defects.\n\n   Any unseen genetic defects in an animal to be cloned could ruin a large number (if not all) attempts to clone the animal.  Any animal to be cloned could possibly need extensive testing before the cloning process begins; again, slowing down the idea of mass-producing foods or medicines without the use of more equipment to attempt to create more clones.\n\n   Cloning equipment, in order to do its duty, needs to be precise.  Such equipment will not come cheaply.  While in the future, prices of this equipment may drop due to the aging of the technology or the possibility of mass production in the future, it is still expensive, as no kinds of grants or rebates by any government organization exist(as far as I know).\n   \n   If cloning equipment and techniques were improved upon, the cloning of animals would be very helpful to society.  As these techniques are now, however, it is not much more beneficial to clone animals as it is to simply breed them; a much more cost-effective solution for the present.
846528
I'm still undecided on stem cell therapy.  As of right now, I'm not down with cutting up an embryo for the sake of someone else.  BUT if someone in my family were to get sick and could benefit from stem cells, I'm sure I'd be all for it.  (so what, I'm a hypocrite :)\n\nAnd cloning people is just stupid.  Why would you do that? We already have enough people running around this world.  It's a waste.  And it would morally wrong to clone ppl just for their organs.  So, again, NO on the cloning.
656095
For cloning organs/tissue but against cloning human beings
509667
I would not want cloning after I die for the simple reason that there is only one of me. However for a clone to be me it would have to have my memories, my talents, my thoughts, etc. ,the clone would look like me but have a completely different life than I, so if they could take out the weaknesses from my genes and make a clone that doesn't have any major health problems I would consider letting them clone me after I die.
899552
Hello, and what an interesting question.  \n\nMy answer is not about cloning humans, but rather cloning cells from humans that have the potential to turn into specialized cells.\n\nCorporate support of cloning human cells (like all Pharmaceutical companies supporting drug development) would only result in treating "end stage" support for diseases. \n\nThis is not a good thing.  Here is the reason: \n\nCorporate support generally does not advocate a fundamental understanding of how the disease begins, and it would not support understanding how to prevent the disease. \n\nThe best reason to support human cloning, in my opinion, is to understand disease and to prevent it. This has nothing to do with profits. \n\nIf Corporate companies supported preventative medicine, then they would make small profits in the long run.  \n\nBut when they support "end stage" therapies, their profit potential is limitless.\n\nNowadays Corporate profits can be hidden in money driven governmental policies (I live in the USA), by making human cell cloning sound wonderful and very humanitarian (and costly).  \n\nBut the real point is missed by consumers (who pay taxes which would offset tax benefits given to corporations anyways). \n\nThe real point in human cloning should be in preventing the disease in the first place.  And that is the real potential in human cloning of cells.  \n\nMaybe there are some humanitarians and good doers out there that really see this potential, and when you find them, they probably have nothing to do with corporate industry (or politicians or universities).  \n\nMy suspicion is that the humanitarians are being silenced throughout this money making frenzy for human cell cloning.  \n\nAs this happens, a shift towards "end stage" treatment will be emphasized, and understanding of the biology behind the disease will be suppressed (or, worse, even patented).  \n\nThis philosophy of treating diseases (as opposed to preventing them or even curing them) does have its advantages.  \n\nFirst, you won't have to change your lifestyle.  \n\nSecond, if you work in the field (as I do) then you can be assured of a long career supported by government and corporate entities and monies.  \n\nIt was fun thinking of our future.  I hope I helped you out!