Human Embryo Cloning

[Lisa]

I think, if it is gonna help, possibly help find cures etc for terminal illnesses, then why not, as kether & LE have stated, up until a certain stage, the embryo, is just a mass of cell, so why not, all for a good cause!!

[Guest Kether]

QUOTE (Aaron @ Jun 16 2004, 15:53)

QUOTE (LiquidEyes @ Jun 16 2004, 15:09) QUOTE (Aaron @ Jun 16 2004, 14:09) I class it as a life as soon as the Sperm and Egg join together... In that case, given you have such a 'trivial' definition of life, what is your objection to taking life?   There are two inter-related questions. 1. What is life? 2. Is life sacred?   It's all very well making an arbitrary definition of life to suit your ethos on its sanctity, or vice versa. LE: Well i dont class the sperm and egg thing as definition of life, but i do class it as the start of life. i.e the beginning of the creation of an organism.   Why should it be classed as life at say 6 to 8 weeks from conception but not as an embryo? Surely its the same thing, just at different stages of its development. Embryo -> Foetus, Child -> Adult etc.   As organisms, we are still just a "bundle of cells", whether its 2 or 3, or several billion or however many the average adult human has, doesnt mean it shouldnt be classified as life, after all there are such things as single celled organisms, are they not classed as alive? I'm sure if they found these on Mars, they would class it as life?!   Is that trivial?   Kether: I cant fault the reasons why they want to do this, obviously finding cures for these conditions is a very good thing, I just dont think that creating (what i consider) a life and then destroying it, is a good way to go.   I dont follow a religion as such, so maybe using the term "playing god" was bad idea, but i do believe in a soul, although whether an organism has one at that stage of its life, i cant decide. Yes, a single celled organism is life. There isn't outrage when we kill them. We kill them all the time such as when we disinfect our bathrooms or kitchens or do the washing up.   In general there isn't any objection to animal testing as we value human life over animals. Of course you do get nutters who go out trying to kill scientists involved in animal testing but in general people don't mind.   The real issue here is where we define an embyro as being alive. For me, something that is alive is self-sustaining. An embryo can not live in the real world. It can't feed, it can't sleep. By the time the embryo would be destroyed by the researchers it wouldn't have the bodily organs that would make it recognisable as human. It has the potential to be a life but it isn't yet.   We could go on about this all day, the same with pro-lifers and their mindless anti-abortion rabble which is mostly patriarchal spouting rather than any real care for the unborn fetus itself.

[Guest Kether]

QUOTE (Lisa @ Jun 16 2004, 15:56)

I think, if it is gonna help, possibly help find cures etc for terminal illnesses, then why not, as kether & LE have stated, up until a certain stage, the embryo, is just a mass of cell, so why not, all for a good cause!!

Yeah, donate it for a prize in a raffle.

[Lisa]

QUOTE (Kether @ Jun 16 2004, 16:02)

QUOTE (Lisa @ Jun 16 2004, 15:56) I think, if it is gonna help, possibly help find cures etc for terminal illnesses, then why not, as kether & LE have stated, up until a certain stage, the embryo, is just a mass of cell, so why not, all for a good cause!! Yeah, donate it for a prize in a raffle. thats an idea, but ive had a hysterectomy, so I cant enter!!

[LiquidEyes]

QUOTE (Aaron @ Jun 16 2004, 15:53)

I just dont think that creating (what i consider) a life and then destroying it, is a good way to go.

Why not?

 

Your definition of life is fair enough - as good as any. But it doesn't hold that life is "sacred".

 

You say you reckon a person is alive once the sperm & egg come together. Why doesn't a sperm count as alive? What about asexual animals - when do their offspring "come to life"?

 

I don't see things so black and white - "this is life", "this isn't". The only important things to me are principles like "quality of life" - i.e. not causing suffering to living creatures, and not taking away life from a self-aware animal.

[Aaron]

All very good points Andy & Kether.

 

By my definition of life, then yes a sperm cell is alive, which if i hold life in any of its forms with such high regard, why dont i think of that when i get the kleenex out?

 

On the same token I could be regarded as hyprocritical as i'm very much into eating meat, which obviously involves the slaughter of animals who by your definition of life are self aware. (Just out of interest, are you vegetarian andy?)

 

So yeah good points, you've made me think about (which i'm gonna do for quite a while i reckon) sides of it that for some reason i never really put much thought to before, and that it isnt as black and white as i believed.

 

Good stuff, i'm quite glad i posted this thread now

 

[LiquidEyes]

QUOTE (Aaron @ Jun 16 2004, 19:04)

(Just out of interest, are you vegetarian andy?)

No, I'm a self-interested hypocrite.