for the most part though, I think all this stuff is annoying as are the people that seem to just not get it.

here's the think though. for the one sucessful clone attempt they get, there will be lots of failures. but these are humans were talking about. cloning is not a exact science. the only way you can tell a baby wioll be normal is a) if it makes it past the ball of cells stage b)if the foetal blood samples and babies shaope checks out. what if they don't? We have effectyivly let a malformed baby grow and then killed it, after it beconmes a ball of cells (and abortion will only terminate before that point!)

couples that cannot have children may want a clone. they may want their own child. but to have a child geneticall identical to the father, or even mother. ghumans have already partially screwed up natural selection by definition. Cloning reduces the variety of our gene pool, if it becomes widespread then who knows. while i feel sorry for parents that can't have kids, they can always adopt a baby, or go test tube. it may not be 100% their own but it stops the needless suffereing of all the many failure before you get the 1 desirable baby. As the technology stands at the moment, a doctor who clones a human is breaking his oath because he has to terminate the life of all the failures. I would imagine someone will still clone a child just to be the first, i just hope it stops there.

My friend argues that if it does happen, our world will turn out to be like the movie Gattica, where "perfect" humans are seperated to a class above all others. He also thinks that it would cause massive ammounts of dysfunctional families who couldn't afford to "enhance" their unborn child. "I HATE YOU MOM AND DAD!!! Why couldn't you make me smarter, or better looking like Torie Wilson DAMNIT!!!"

Humanshell

Are we are not in enough trouble already as
the human race? This is the beginning of the end of mankind, as I see it.

If this technology is made available, it is not unreasonable to assume that the rich will be able to purchase a new liver or to have their children genetically enhanced, but the poor will not. I worry that such an Orwellian scenario would ultimately lead to insurmountable social division where classes are separated by not only economic and social advantages, but by genetic ones, as well. Children of the rich would have better mental and physical apptitude than those of the poor � so much for the level playing field

An important foundation of American society is the belief (regardless of its truth) in equal opportunity. The founding fathers challenged 18th century European notions of aristocracy, class and birthright. In our so-called meritocracy, one's success or failure is a product of his discipline and hard work, not of his lineage or ancestry. This 'self-promotion-through-industry' argument is espoused every day by conservative members of this forum. But genetic engineering essentially undermines the myth of equal opportunity and restores the concept of aristocracy by establishing biological difference along class lines. Fairness is based upon the notion of equality, and genetic engineering is inherently unequal and unfair.