House Passes Anti-Cloning Bill

[Pyrrho]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,79770,00.html


The bill, sponsored by Reps. Bart Stupak, D-Mich., and Dave Weldon, R-Fla., and backed by President Bush, passed 241-155. The measure prohibits any form of cloning, including therapeutic cloning used for research of Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, diabetes and other diseases.

"We cannot afford to treat the issue of human embryo cloning lightly," said Stupak, one of the lawmakers who argued that a cloned embryo is a human even before it enters the womb. "The human race is not open to experimentation at any level, even the molecular level."

[corplinx]

I wish I had an opinion on this. On one hand we don't want to be flat earthers. On the other hand, there are legitimate issues with human cloning that cannot be labeled as "fear of progress".

I think I'll abstain from forming an opinion for a while.

[Richard G]

Here my beef with cloning. Couple of eggheads clone a viable human in a lab. Who then is responsible for raising, supporting, and nurturing the doubly bastardized child?

[ssibal]

This is very unfortunate.

[corplinx]

One thing that gets to me are people who claim all of these benefits for academic cloning. Of course, I haven't seen good evidence of these benefits.

Promising miracle cures reminds me of snake oil salesmen.

Remember the Bush restrictions on government funded stem cell research? Remember how opponents portrayed it as a total ban on all stem cell research? Remember how bone marrow and other sources of stem cells were found for people doing goverment funded research to use?

I have a feeling the human cloning ban is being demagogued to once again make Bush look a fundmentalist who opposes progress. I do not care for people who say "how can you look at someone in a wheelchair and tell them no?".

Instead should I fill them with wishful thinking? You might as well tell them magical fairies might heal them. Once we have a baseline for the tangible benefits of cloning, I'll revise those remarks.

Still though, my mind is not made on this. I am not even sure if this sort of ban is constitutional.

[fishbob]

The human race is not open to experimentation at any level, even the molecular level." I keep getting the feeling that our legislators don't really understand cloning.

Sometimes voluntary and sometimes not, American citizens have been subjects of social experiments, drug testing, psychological testing, resistance to radiation testing, and who knows what else in the last 50 years. When have humans not been open to experimentation? Human cells get more consideration than actual individual humans?

[DialecticMaterialist]

Fear of cloning is nothing more then common as dirt neophobia.

Really the conjectures about its possible abuse are usually very far fetched. The only legit fears are that it can result in people trying to clone wives/daughters and such and treating them in an opressive manner. Or perhaps in mess ups during the expirimentation. Botha re easily overcome with legilsation and time.

[Stimpson J. Cat]

Richard,

Here my beef with cloning. Couple of eggheads clone a viable human in a lab. Who then is responsible for raising, supporting, and nurturing the doubly bastardized child?

They are, obviously. This is a pretty week case against cloning. millions of unwanted babies are born every year. The danger of an unwanted clone seems pretty minor to me. Why even bother with the expense of cloning a child, if you don't want him/her?


Corplinx,

One thing that gets to me are people who claim all of these benefits for academic cloning. Of course, I haven't seen good evidence of these benefits.

What they are claiming is potential benefits. And in order to see that potential, you would have to do considerable research into the field.

Promising miracle cures reminds me of snake oil salesmen.

nobody is promising miracle cures. What the scientists are saying is that there is an incredible amount of potential in cloning research, and that this potential will never be realized if the research is not allowed.

Remember the Bush restrictions on government funded stem cell research? Remember how opponents portrayed it as a total ban on all stem cell research? Remember how bone marrow and other sources of stem cells were found for people doing government funded research to use?

No, I don't remember it that way. I remember Bush putting unnecessary restrictions on a potentially very important area of research, based entirely on his irrational religious beliefs. Some people may have exaggerated it to make it sound even worse than it was, but that doesn't mean it wasn't bad.

I have a feeling the human cloning ban is being demagogued to once again make Bush look a fundmentalist who opposes progress. I do not care for people who say "how can you look at someone in a wheelchair and tell them no?".

Bush is a fundamentalist who opposes anything that goes against his irrational beliefs. That is bad enough.

Instead should I fill them with wishful thinking? You might as well tell them magical fairies might heal them. Once we have a baseline for the tangible benefits of cloning, I'll revise those remarks.

And there lies the problem. If we don't allow research into cloning to be done, how can anybody ever produce tangible benefits of it? The same could be said of any field of basic research. If you demand that only areas of research that we can be absolutely sure will provide tangible benefits, should be allowed, then no basic research will be done. Science will stagnate, and many potentially beneficial areas of science will be left unexplored.

Still though, my mind is not made on this. I am not even sure if this sort of ban is constitutional.

Well, it is certainly an infringement of liberty. No law restricting the actions of a person should be made, unless it can be demonstrated that such restrictions are necessary to protect people's rights, or to protect the viability of society itself.

That's the whole problem with this nonsense. Unless somebody can come up with a compelling rational reason why this research should not be allowed, the Government should keep its nose out of it.

Dr. Stupid

[fishbob]

Here my beef with cloning. Couple of eggheads clone a viable human in a lab. Who then is responsible for raising, supporting, and nurturing the doubly bastardized child? The kid does not pop out of the paper tray on the Xerox machine. The kid pops out of some woman. A parent.

[Javalar]

Originally posted by Richard G
Here my beef with cloning. Couple of eggheads clone a viable human in a lab. Who then is responsible for raising, supporting, and nurturing the doubly bastardized child? And besides, they'll just find someone beforehand. It's not like they'll just stand around saying: "Oh my! Looks like we have no familly to take care of this baby. I guess we'll just leave it on the table." :rolleyes: