Would human clones be soul-less?

  • Thread starter Thread starter BibleReader
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
vern humphrey:
If human clones have no soul, then it is no sin to make a human clone.
I think that it would be a sin to “create” human clones, based on what Blood Rain said…
Blood Rain:
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.
Once you rationalize the first miss-step it is easy to fall into a pattern of behavior. When we devalue our own human dignity, we devalue all human dignity and in so doing we also devalue Christ. Under God’s direction humanity went from dust to slaves to friends; let’s not waste God’s efforts.
vern humphrey:
Since the Church definitely says it IS a sin, clearly the Church’s positon is that clones would have human, immortal souls.
The Chuch is talking about protecting human dignity and anything that would take away from or devalues human dignity is a sin.

Just because the Church says that cloning humans would be a sin; how does your statement follow that the Church’s position is that clones would have human, immortal souls? That doesn’t make any sense at all to me. Please explain your logic.
 
40.png
Wildgraywolf:
It also begs the question of why would somone want to clone a human?
To see if it can be done.
To figure out how it can be done.
To be the first to do so.
To do something “beneficial” with a human clone like transplants.
To do something malicious with a human clone like transplants.
To do something that my brain can’t even conceive.
 
40.png
Wildgraywolf:
Just because the Church says that cloning humans would be a sin; how does your statement follow that the Church’s position is that clones would have human, immortal souls? That doesn’t make any sense at all to me. Please explain your logic.
If human clones did not have human, rational, immortal souls, then they would be nothing more than collections of human body parts. And the Church is not opposed to growing body parts for medical purposes, as far as I know. The Church is opposed to human cloning because there is at least a substantial probability that the soul of a clone will be a rational, immortal soul. Good enough reason to not try it.
 
Blood Rain:
Jesus wasn’t conceived, but he was fully human.
Jesus was conceived. Read your bible, specifically the Annunciation story; “…you shall conceive and bear a son…”
Blood Rain:
Docetism is the heresy that Jesus was part human
Jesus wasn’t part anything. Jesus is totally God and totally human. Two natures in one Being. Does the term Incarnation mean anything to you? Check out my signature and perhaps it’s possible the Nicean and Apostles Creed slipped your mind.
 
Blood Rain:
To see if it can be done.
To figure out how it can be done.
To be the first to do so.
To do something “beneficial” with a human clone like transplants.
To do something malicious with a human clone like transplants.
To do something that my brain can’t even conceive.
I think that would take away from human dignity, would you not agree?
 
40.png
Wildgraywolf:
Jesus was conceived. Read your bible, specifically the Annunciation story; “…you shall conceive and bear a son…”
You are right, of course. I have know idea why I wrote that. I meant Adam and Eve were not conceived but still human. Duh.
Jesus wasn’t part anything. Jesus is totally God and totally human. Two natures in one Being. Does the term Incarnation mean anything to you?
Um, yeah, it does, which why I cited the particular heresy.
 
vern humphrey:
How is that different from saying, "The distinction here is born as opposed to not born?"Actually, it’s very different. The terms I used were “engineered” and “conceived”; these describe how something/somone is brought into existence. Your terms; “born” and “not born”; describe how something/somone is **brought into the world (or not) **after being brought into existence. See the difference?
vern humphrey:
Please explain how that affects the mechanism of ensoulment.We believe that human life begins at conception; ensoulment would occur at that same moment. Since a human clone wouldn’t be conceived it wouldn’t be truly human. Such a being would have all the attributes of humanity, but not have a soul.
vern humphrey:
If what you say is true, then it would be no sin to kill a clone. In fact, they could be butchered and eaten.It would be sinful to “create” a human clone in the first place.
vern humphrey:
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.I believe it would be sin to clone a human for reasons I’ve stated previously.
 
40.png
Wildgraywolf:
I think it would be for the same reason you noted below (in bold).
**Blood Rain [/quote said:
]
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.
What “Human subjects?” If they don’t have souls, they aren’t human, are they?

40.png
Wildgraywolf:
It also begs the question of why would somone want to clone a human?
To “beg the question” doesn’t mean “to ask the question.”

Begging the question is a logicall fallacy in which someone asks you to accept some version of their premise so they can “prove” the premise.

If you’re asking why someone would want to clone a human, all that is necessary is to point out that several organizations have said they INTEND to clone a human being.
 
40.png
grandadmiralboo:
If human clones did not have human, rational, immortal souls, then they would be nothing more than collections of human body parts. And the Church is not opposed to growing body parts for medical purposes, as far as I know. The Church is opposed to human cloning because there is at least a substantial probability that the soul of a clone will be a rational, immortal soul. Good enough reason to not try it.
I think the whole human cloning process devalues human dignity. God created our reproductive process therefore it is holy. In cloning humans we would me making a mockery of God and His greatest creation. In Genesis, when God was done creating, He declared His human creation to be “very good”.
 
40.png
Wildgraywolf:
I think the whole human cloning process devalues human dignity. God created our reproductive process therefore it is holy. In cloning humans we would me making a mockery of God and His greatest creation. In Genesis, when God was done creating, He declared His human creation to be “very good”.
That indicates that clones have human – and thus immortal – souls. Because if they don’t, human dignity doesn’t come into the picture.

Consider these points:

Is it wrong to clone sheep and other animals? No. It’s been done, and the Church has not condemned it. Sheep do not have immortal souls.

Is it wrong, with proper safeguards, to experiment on humans? No – human experiments are performed every day. Without such experiments we would not have the drugs and medical treatments we now have.

Is it wrong to take tissue from a human body? No. Tissue samples are taken every day, for many reasons.

Is it wrong to grow human tissue artificially? No. Human tissue is grown artificially every day – to provide skin grafts for burns, to provide materials for research and so on.

So why is cloning wrong? Because the Clone would have a human soul, and because the process would involve the killing of many humans to produce a single successful (but typically flawed) clone.
 
vern humphrey said:
What “Human subjects?” If they don’t have souls, they aren’t human, are they?.

You referenced a quote from Blood Rain and he/she is in a better position to explain what was meant. My thinking was that Blood Rain was alluding to the ethical/moral dangers of human cloning.
vern humphrey:
To “beg the question” doesn’t mean “to ask the question.”
Begging the question is a logicall fallacy in which someone asks you to accept some version of their premise so they can “prove” the premise.
Ouch! I guess I should choose my expressions more carefully. 😉
vern humphrey:
If you’re asking why someone would want to clone a human
Yes, I was asking that, but I see Blood Rain already answered that in a previous post.
vern humphrey:
, all that is necessary is to point out that several organizations have said they INTEND to clone a human being.
Yes, I am aware of this.
 
vern humphrey:
How would you make an “adult clone” – other than by producing an embryo and growing it in the womb to term, then raising it to adulthood?

All clones developed so far (including the sheep, Dolly) were gestated and passed through the birth canal. Do you envision a woman passing a 6-foot, 180lb man through her birth canal?
Hi Vern 😃

Read the whole post, I said “distant future”. Your assumption that future clones MUST be made as they are today 1-2 hundred years down the road is not realistic. They will have all sorts of new technology. Compair 2005 to 1805 … have we come a ways?

-D
 
40.png
Darrel:
Hi Vern 😃

Read the whole post, I said “distant future”. Your assumption that future clones MUST be made as they are today 1-2 hundred years down the road is not realistic. They will have all sorts of new technology. Compair 2005 to 1805 … have we come a ways?

-D
So in the distant future women will have birth canals three feet wide?http://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon10.gif

If we’re going to postulate that clones can be “born” in an adult state (with adult skills – because what good is an adult with no language or other skills?) why not simply postulate we get Slime Devils as slaves from the plant Meleagroni?
 
40.png
Wildgraywolf:
You referenced a quote from Blood Rain and he/she is in a better position to explain what was meant. My thinking was that Blood Rain was alluding to the ethical/moral dangers of human cloning.
If they are human, they have human souls. It is not immoral to clone an animal that doesn’t have a human soul.

After all, the Church did not condemn cloning sheep.
 
vern humphrey:
That indicates that clones have human – and thus immortal – souls. Because if they don’t, human dignity doesn’t come into the picture.

Consider these points:

Is it wrong to clone sheep and other animals? No. It’s been done, and the Church has not condemned it. Sheep do not have immortal souls.

Is it wrong, with proper safeguards, to experiment on humans? No – human experiments are performed every day. Without such experiments we would not have the drugs and medical treatments we now have.

Is it wrong to take tissue from a human body? No. Tissue samples are taken every day, for many reasons.

Is it wrong to grow human tissue artificially? No. Human tissue is grown artificially every day – to provide skin grafts for burns, to provide materials for research and so on.

So why is cloning wrong? Because the Clone would have a human soul, and because the process would involve the killing of many humans to produce a single successful (but typically flawed) clone.
Most of this I’ve already addressed in previous posts, please go back and read them. It seems pointless to keep repeating myself.

We are discussing the cloning of humans; are you saying that humans and animals are of equal value?

God created the human reproductive process; are you saying that cloning is just as good as God’s method?

Are you saying that a being brought about through an artifical process is on equal par with one brought about through God’s created process?

Are you saying that the unnatural is on equal footing with the natural?

Are you saying that man can create life just as good as God can?
 
vern humphrey:
So in the distant future women will have birth canals three feet wide?http://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon10.gif

If we’re going to postulate that clones can be “born” in an adult state (with adult skills – because what good is an adult with no language or other skills?) why not simply postulate we get Slime Devils as slaves from the plant Meleagroni?
lol,

Let’s not assume anything about the potential of future technology. The idea of growing these things in some sort of tank at some point really doesn’t seem that far fetched to me. If I told you in 1955 that in the year 2000 everyone would have a high power personal computer with an internet connected to it you might have told me to seek medical help.

Not to mention the space shuttle and little things like DVD’s and microwave ovens. That was only 50 years ago. And technology is a geometric progression like an A-Bomb. 2-4-8-16-32-64 etc etc. If it’s a money maker the technology will be developed sooner or later.

-D
 
40.png
Wildgraywolf:
Most of this I’ve already addressed in previous posts, please go back and read them. It seems pointless to keep repeating myself.

We are discussing the cloning of humans; are you saying that humans and animals are of equal value?
No, you’re saying that. You’re saying that a clone would not haved a soul, and that would make it no better than an animal.
40.png
Wildgraywolf:
God created the human reproductive process; are you saying that cloning is just as good as God’s method?
No, I’m saying that there is nothing in the ensoulment mechanism that would be affected by cloning. I have invited you to explain the ensoulment mechanism and show how it would be affected by cloning, but so far you haven’t done that.

I have pointed out that it is the Church’s position that clones would have souls – which is the basis for the Church’s position that it would be immoral to produce a human clone.
40.png
Wildgraywolf:
Are you saying that a being brought about through an artifical process is on equal par with one brought about through God’s created process?
That’s what the Church says – and why the Church considers attempting to clone humans a grave moral issue.
40.png
Wildgraywolf:
Are you saying that the unnatural is on equal footing with the natural?
That’s nonsense. Cloning is not the SAME as sexual reproduction – but you have failed to show how that affects the ensoulment mechanism.

Since you present no evidence to refute the Church’s position, I will follow the Church. To clone a human being would be a mortal sin because the clone would have a soul.
40.png
Wildgraywolf:
Are you saying that man can create life just as good as God can?
If you consider cloning impossible, why are we having this discussion?

I note you add “just as good as God can.” Clones typically are highly flawed – hence, not “just as good as God can.”
 
40.png
Darrel:
lol,

Let’s not assume anything about the potential of future technology. The idea of growing these things in some sort of tank at some point really doesn’t seem that far fetched to me. If I told you in 1955 that in the year 2000 everyone would have a high power personal computer with an internet connected to it you might have told me to seek medical help.
So YOUR vision of the future is right and mine is wrong? You have a chrystal ball?

I point out that an adult is a difficult thing to produce – because an adult is more than a large baby. An adult requires many years to develop, and to acquire the basic skills needed to function as an adult.

Now you can write a science fiction story about that – but go back and read the science fiction of the 50s and see how far off they were.
 
vern humphrey:
So YOUR vision of the future is right and mine is wrong? You have a chrystal ball?

I point out that an adult is a difficult thing to produce – because an adult is more than a large baby. An adult requires many years to develop, and to acquire the basic skills needed to function as an adult.

Now you can write a science fiction story about that – but go back and read the science fiction of the 50s and see how far off they were.
hehe 😃

I’m saying that technology is a geometric progression which I mention in the second half of my post (which you ignored). I agree that an adult is a difficult thing to reproduce in an accelerated manor. But I can’t assume that at some point in the future even if it’s a thousand years from now that it won’t happen.

What limits do you place on future technology? Do you feel that this is totally impossible forever? I say there is no limit on it and all sorts of incredible discoveries can be made.

If these things are produced in a tank in an adult form will they have a soul?

-D
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top