V
vern_humphrey
Guest
I’m sorry. I don’t speak Gibberish.
What does that mean?
- Status
What does that mean?
W
Wildgraywolf
Guest
I was talking to a good friend of mine about this same topic. We said pretty much the same stuff, but he added that such a “person” would be a “mockery of human life”. We were speculating if such a “person” would be the “awful horror” mentioned in scripture.
W
Wildgraywolf
Guest
vern humphrey:
Right BibleReder?
I think what BibleReader means is that a cloned “person” wouldn’t be truly human, but rather an instant easy bake “life form”. You know; add water, eggs, and bake at 325 for 20 min. In short it might look human, act human, but it would’t really be human.
Right BibleReder?
V
vern_humphrey
Guest
That’s perilously close to the reasoning that says an unborn child isn’t a “person” and therefore has no right to life, and can be killed at a whim and flushed down the sink.
How do we arrive at the conclusion that a cloned person wouldn’t be truly human?
And while we’re at it, how do we know what will happen a thousand years into the future?
B
BibleReader
Guest
Essentially, yes. It would not be a “descendant of Adam” who “inherited” the stain of Original Sin.
It would be a really attractive, strong, vital, inexhaustible, entertaining Duncan Hines cake. The closest think it would have to a “parent” would be the “oven” it pops out of.
V
vern_humphrey
Guest
Does this person have human DNA? If so, he or she must be human. Humans have human souls.
When you talk about “mixing” characteristics, remember, we are ALL mixes – check and see how many direct ancestors you had 20 generations back!
W
Wildgraywolf
Guest
vern humphrey:
I wonder what it would be like to reproduce asexually like dandelions? Would it be worth the effort? Hmmm…
Easy. Virtually all life on this planet reproduces bisexually. Humans are created in God’s image and likeness. God made Eve for Adam and in that way created humanity to be male and female so they could be fruitful and multiply. Ensoulment occurs at the moment of conception; it is at this moment there exists a complete human being. This process can not occur in a clone; otherwise God would have created humans to reproduce asexually.
I wonder what it would be like to reproduce asexually like dandelions? Would it be worth the effort? Hmmm…
W
Wildgraywolf
Guest
Hahaha, I bet Mother’s Day, Father’s Day and Grandparent’s Day would REALLY be amusing!
Oh… shhh… Don’t disturb “mommy”; she’s self cleaning at the moment…
V
vern_humphrey
Guest
If that’s true then at least one of each pair of normally-occurring identical twins has no soul – because while the basic fertilization of the ovum occurs sexually, the splitting to form twins is asexual.
Now you keep focusing on the fact that clones are produced differently – which no one denies. But you don’t explain how this difference means the resulting human has no soul.
To do that, you have to explain the mechanics of ensoulment and show how it is affected by the cloning process.
W
Wildgraywolf
Guest
vern humphrey:
vern humphrey:
In short a cloned “person” would be a cheap imitation. The “engineers” would be guilty of mocking God and God’s reproductive process. Also, see Post #47.
vern humphrey:
No it’s not. It’s not even in the same ball park. The distinction here might be engineered as opposed to conceived.
vern humphrey:
Because God created humans; male and female in order to reproduce. Because conception never took place. Because it wouldn’t have a mother and a father. A cloned “person” might have all the attributes of a human, but none of the substance.
In short a cloned “person” would be a cheap imitation. The “engineers” would be guilty of mocking God and God’s reproductive process. Also, see Post #47.
vern humphrey:
Well we don’t know what the future holds, this is a fascinating hypothetical discussion.
W
Wildgraywolf
Guest
vern humphrey:
Bisexual reproduction = Sperm fertilizes ovum. Immediately after conception occurs cell division begins. Twins are the result of how fertilized cells divide. Each twin is fully human.
vern humphrey:
vern humphrey:
But you don’t explain how this difference means the resulting human has no soul.
To do that, you have to explain the mechanics of ensoulment and show how it is affected by the cloning process.There is no ensoulment for a clone because it is engineered outside of God’s created bisexual reproductive protocol. Clones are not brought about by or through a natural process.
Ugh! That’s not asexual at all.
Bisexual reproduction = Sperm fertilizes ovum. Immediately after conception occurs cell division begins. Twins are the result of how fertilized cells divide. Each twin is fully human.
vern humphrey:
Clones are engineered and yes, I keep focusing on that because that’s the topic we’re discussing.
vern humphrey:
But you don’t explain how this difference means the resulting human has no soul.
To do that, you have to explain the mechanics of ensoulment and show how it is affected by the cloning process.There is no ensoulment for a clone because it is engineered outside of God’s created bisexual reproductive protocol. Clones are not brought about by or through a natural process.
W
Wildgraywolf
Guest
Now that I understand, I agree totally.
Btw, I like the very colorful way you express yourself.
W
Wildgraywolf
Guest
I would disagree with you here, because clones are engineered outside of God’s natural reproductive process.
I would agree with you here in saying that the clone would be a copy - a fictional human being as it were.
God created humans; male and female and God created our reproductive processes. Without males and females - fathers and mothers - there is no conception. Without conception there can be no human being.
We are far more than a collection of cells, genes, DNA, amino acids, and proteins; remember that God created humanity in His image and Likeness. God breathed Life into humanity. How can we say that a clone engineered outside God’s natural process has a soul?
B
BibleReader
Guest
vern humphrey:
If the molecules making up the double helix in our store-bought, absolutely wonderful hominid copy never spent a moment’s time in the human family, and instead come from the Rohm & Haas petro-chemical plant on Aramingo Avenue in Philadelphia, after it spent 30,000,000 years in the ground in Kuwait, before which it was dinosaur droppings, is it “human”?
Is my mirror reflection “human”?
Is a photocopy an “original”?
Is my violin, made by Joe the Butcher in his spare time, but indistinguishable from a Stradavarius, a Stradivarius?
Your approach bootstraps itself into your desired destination. You ask, “Does it have human DNA?” Well, that’s THE question – not a way to answering the question.
If the molecules making up the double helix in our store-bought, absolutely wonderful hominid copy never spent a moment’s time in the human family, and instead come from the Rohm & Haas petro-chemical plant on Aramingo Avenue in Philadelphia, after it spent 30,000,000 years in the ground in Kuwait, before which it was dinosaur droppings, is it “human”?
Is my mirror reflection “human”?
Is a photocopy an “original”?
Is my violin, made by Joe the Butcher in his spare time, but indistinguishable from a Stradavarius, a Stradivarius?
B
Bruised_Reed
Guest
Jesus wasn’t conceived, but he was fully human.
Docetism is the heresy that Jesus was part human
F
flick427
Guest
Well, the other guy on the Terminator can reporduce I think as liquid metal, that was pretty cool, but he doesn’t have a soul, he just kinda turns into other people.
B
Bruised_Reed
Guest
Would the idea of human clones even be a problem if clones lacked a rational soul?
Cloning cells, cloning sheep, even invitro-fertilization of animals are morraly acceptable. I think the main problem with this kind of research and experimentation is that eventually someone, who doesn’t appreciate the value of human life, wants to try experiments on human subjects.
Cloning cells, cloning sheep, even invitro-fertilization of animals are morraly acceptable. I think the main problem with this kind of research and experimentation is that eventually someone, who doesn’t appreciate the value of human life, wants to try experiments on human subjects.
V
vern_humphrey
Guest
How is that different from saying, “The distinction here is born as opposed to not born?”
Please explain how that affects the mechanism of ensoulment.
If what you say is true, then it would be no sin to kill a clone. In fact, they could be butchered and eaten.
In fact, if they have no soul, it would be no more a sin to clone a human being than it was to clone a sheep.
V
vern_humphrey
Guest
Blood Rain:
If human clones have no soul, then it is no sin to make a human clone.
Since the Church definitely says it IS a sin, clearly the Church’s positon is that clones would have human, immortal souls.
Thanks, Blood Rain. Our posts must have crossed in cyberspace. You said it better than I did.
If human clones have no soul, then it is no sin to make a human clone.
Since the Church definitely says it IS a sin, clearly the Church’s positon is that clones would have human, immortal souls.
W
Wildgraywolf
Guest
Blood Rain:
Blood Rain:
I think it would be for the same reason you noted below (in bold).
Blood Rain:
It also begs the question of why would somone want to clone a human?
- Status