We all know that cloning is possible, we also know that cloning is more-often-than-not quite successful. However, what you may not know is that companies have begun to offer cloning services for family pets. A particular company in Mill Valley, here in California, has been granted the sole worldwide license for cloning cats, dogs, and select endangered species. BioArts International, aptly named, was given this right under the "Best Friends Again" program. This program works together with a Korean company called the Sooam Biotech Research Foundation. The company will offer slots to customers willing to pay about $100,000 for the clone.
Should cloning be legal, or to what extent should it be legal? Cloning endangered species seems reasonable, but house pets? Or is it all just wrong?
Original Article: http://www.upi.com/NewsTrack/Science/2008/05/22/company_offers_to_clone_family_pets/1594/
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
25 comments:
I don't really see much wrong with cloning. I don't at all buy into that whole religious, you can't play god-it's amoral and wrong thing. However, I do understand some people's concerns. I think that what most people worry about when it comes to cloning is escalation. They watch all those scifi movies and worry about cloning people, genetic discrimination, and things like that. I don't really see much wrong with cloning people either. A while ago, Mr. Silton was saying that the problem would come up of how to treat the clone, but the only that's different about a clone is that they're exactly the same.
I think that this not a very good idea at all. I dont think that we should clone people and play God at all. I am interested in the sciences, but not actually cloning people. If a family pet dies then its perfectly natrual to be sad but wanting to clone it and do it again is borderline blasphemous. WE should not be medeling in this field. The effects could be disaterous, such as mutated animals and such. This also could lead to the cloning of people, and maybe the creation of entire genetic armies. We should not get involved in this at all.
Hey, I'm not advocating cloning people or even cloning at all. What I'm saying is that people's positions on this issue are largely motivated by fear, a fear that, actually, I think is a good thing. As long as people are afraid of the negative reprecussions of cloning, they're far more likely to be on thier guard for them. And seriously Addie "borderline blasphemous"? How do you know that cloning wasn't all part of God's plan? How do you know he didn't specifically make us smart enough so that we'd be able to clone someday? So we can cure diseases and be reuinted with our favorite pets???
btw somebody's been watching too much starwars episode II
As a follower of God, I do not believe that cloning was in his plan. I think that everyone has a specific purpose and that He should be the founder and creator, not some nerdy guy in a white lab coat who was paid to do so. Yes, Ellie, seriously, it is "borderline blasphemous".
The fear that this is generating is not necessary, I feel. If we fear it s much, then we should not even get involved. Bet letting it start with cloning pets for cash, then it will grow whether we like it or not. We should get rid of this as soon as possible.
LEAVE GORGE LUCAS OUT OF THIS!
First of all, a "nerdy guy in a white lab coat" would not be doing any of the "creator" 's job since we're talking about CLONING (which means copying). Isn't imitation the highest form of flattery?
Flattery is good For fasion and other materialsitic trends. Yes he is creating, he is bringing life into this world in other ways then classic reproduction. He is playing God by bringing a new life into this world via petri dish, not womb, and with a lab creatd baby, not gametes.
I don't necesarily believe in the whole "doing God's work" theory, but I also don't really understand the point of cloning in general. I do get that sometimes it may be necessary in order to discover something (disease, etc). However, I don't really understand why we would want to clone people, pets, etc. for any reason besides scientific research.
I think that cloning your house pet is going overboard with the whole concept. Cloning should be left for scientific uses only. Besides, if people start cloning their house pets, it won't be long before we can clone our dead family members. I think this would create a problem for our society in the long run. If we think that we can clone anything or anyone if they're gone, later generations might have difficulties coping with loss.
I think this is really weird, funny and sort of cool. Cloning has been a debated moral issue and i think that cloning pets is not immoral. I think that in the individual case of this company, its actions are not immoral. people want there pets to live forever and it is really a harmless dream that science can now make come true. I am sure scientifically it is more difficult to clone humans so it is not to dangerous to have this technology.
Cloning poses a difficult ethical question because one must wonder whether the clone shares the same feelings and personality as the original. If so, would killing the clone be the same as killing the “real thing?” Many are unable to decide on cloning because of these issues. I believe that, if done for the betterment of society, cloning may provide increased medical research opportunities. At the same time, cloning opens the door to unethical and questionable practices.
I don't see the point of cloning pets at all, then again, I never had a pet. Anyway, I don't think there's anything wrong with cloning humans. It probably won't be used to recreate "normal" people, as that would only waste resources, not only to clone them, but then food, water etc. I don't see how people can argue with cloning organs in order to cure people, as your not really creating new life, just fixing a damaged organ.
we can't clone anything or anyone becuase to do so would be to anger god. in fact, we cant make any scientific progress whatsoever, or we will be faced god's wrath. Cloning is like spitting in our creator's face, which is just plain immoral and wrong. we must act more morally and stop trying to play god by advancing potentially life-saving sciences.
I would feel weird to have my dog or cat cloned. To me it wouldnt be the same. I feel that cloning people is something that we shouldnt do, but that it is ok to do it on organs that would be able to help people out. I feel doing that would also be more exceptable with the religous people because it wouldnt be creating life but preserving it such as when you get anything artificial put into you to help you survive.
I feel as science is progressing more and more each day, cloning and other amazing feats are bound to occur. Although I feel things should come by naturally, if someone is willing to pay 100,000 for a copy of their dog, so be it. I like how this story's occurrence because it now forces people to face the very controversial issue of stem cell research and related topics. People have been so around the bush for these issues and I hope now people can deal with it head on so we can try to progress more in science.
Cloning is basically just creating a new being with the same traits as an existing one. Therefore, why not let people who have lost pets have the opportunity to have their new ones look exactly the same as the old ones. As far as human cloning goes, even as a believer in science, I believe that it could be very dangerous and experiments researching the field should be monitored closely.
I think the idea of cloning still scares people. I mean would it be traumatic for a kid to see his dead dog after a few years? uhh yea? However, of course there will be population willing to pay these amounts just for cloning. I beleieve some may be even caught up in 'cloning' rather than reviving a dead pet :P but this is just my take.
greg is right.
i did not say that.
I think they should clone chickens so that we can end world hunger :) but most deff not cows cause we need to stop global warming! And $100,000 for a clone of a pet is pretty expensive, how much would it cost to clone myself?
Cloning should be legal.
I've actually just heard on the radio today that several meat vendors already use cloning to produce some meat products, although indirectly. They supposedly clone the cows who I believe are more favorable, and then let them do natural breeding with other cows, and the offspring would be the ones who end up on the table.
But cloning costs a lot, so it is not done often. But then again, as time passes, it would probably get less expensive, and would then be more widely used.
I don't think there's anything wrong with cloning, imho. Cloning of humans... may be a bit confusing.
So first of all, as far as the whole God thing goes, I don't think that it wasn't "in his plan" for us to clone because then He probably wouldn't have allowed us to discover how to do it, right? We have been given the ability and opportunity to make medical discoveries--I would call that a gift from God.
Anyway, as far as the pet thing goes, I think it would be silly to pay that much, though I guess the crazy people who want to spend that much money should be able to do so. Also, I don't understand why cloning chickens could help world hunger...I mean I'm sure there's a way, but isn't it easier and less expensive to just breed them?
I was kinda okay with the cloning of pets thing until I read something jeff said about creating a new being with the same traits as an existing one. Would that just be physical traits? If so, I know that I would be very uncomfortable around that clone because the real one has been mentally and emotionally changing throughout its life. It wouldn't really be my pet.
This entire conversation chain was retarded. how did this even facilitate any kind of discussion? its just kids stating their own religious beliefs as reason for why science should or should not proceed.
Post a Comment