Is Cloning A Sin?


#1

The issue of cloning has been in American Culture for some time. Animals have already been cloned. Some speculation on bringing back extinct species like Wooly Mammoths, or even Neanderthal man have been reported in some outlets. Is cloning of animals sin? Is cloning of man a sin?:popcorn:


#2

Human Cloning…

That’s a nightmere. I hate to say this but… You can pass all the laws in the world against it and and have all the moral indignation you can muster against it, but the fact is…nothing can stop it from happening and you can be absolutely sure of that. Athiestic social engineers value science over faith and to them that is an absolute. THEY WILL DO IT, IF THEY HAVEN’T ALREADY.

Consider this… if they can clone a sheep… a horse, a cat and a cow, anything mammal… than guess what… they can clone a “one of us” too. And… if they can’t now,… they will.

You know how…??? They will do it clandestinely … under cover.

Think about that. Who’s to say that they haven’t done so already…??? Hummm…??? Comment. anybody…?

I am for real here… don’t laugh this off…

Can you suggest to me anything in scripture that might suggest that the “Anti-Christ” could be a clone…?

Can you say “sign of the times”…???

Imagine if some socialist anthrpoplogist finds a way to dig up a sample of King Nebuchadnezzar’s DNA and they clone up a new copy of him…???

It sounds like science fiction… but you know what…??? it makes my skin crawl and this should not be passed off as insignificant.

My thoughts on human cloning for what they’re worth. :shrug:


#3

I don't see why cloning of animals would be a sin. It'd be kinda silly to think so after all the other stuff we do to them. They're just animals, who cares? We slaughter them, breed them to get the exact genes that we want, sterilize them, wear their skins, etc.

Cloning humans would be a violation of humanae vitae though, and would be just as much a sin as artificial insemenation. The most popular motive for cloning is immoral too, namely to harvest their organs, ie creating a human life for the sole purpose of killing them. However, singular organs can be cloned without cloning an entire body, so logically no CNS means no soul, so that would be moral if it were JUST those organs being cloned. Also, cloning as we understand it is immoral since all clones are flawed. As we age, our DNA degrades, so if you cloned from an adult, they would have a shorter life expectancy. So, you're knowingly giving somebody a flawed, shortened lifespan. They may find a way to fix that though. Cloning a person also effectively reduces that person to a science experiment since everything is experimental.

The idea of magically bringing a human back to life via a clone is just silly though. First off, a clone is no more like you than an identical twin would be. If you cloned me after I died, it wouldn't be like me coming back to life; they wouldn't have my memories or my soul. It would just be somebody who looks a lot like me, and happens to have my exact DNA. It wouldn't be me, I'd still be dead. Cloning dead pets is just psychological for the owner; that pet is still dead. As noted above though, it's just an animal, so who cares? Second, DNA degrades so fast that you wouldn't be able to clone anybody but the very recently deceased (or somebody who happened to die in a frozen area, like the mammoths did). You wouldn't be able to clone Nebuchadnezzar or anybody from history, even Egyptian mummies (unless they happened to have died in the arctic and their corpse was well preserved). Those people are nothing but dust at this point.


#4

I heard today or recently a short simple idea on, I think, an older podcast of The Good Fight, Barbara McGuigan, EWTN. It came from a priest she was interviewing. You can’t really speak of “reproductive rights” in the case of human beings, because, only animals reproduce, in a sense. Human beings are each unique, in a way animals are not. So… cloning… wouldn’t be at all acceptable for humans - and is definitely distorted and disconnected with deeper reality even though tinkering with a more superficial mechanical one. I agree with an above poster that these things will be pushed intensely - because of the demoniac, mechanical fascination.

More Importantly: these people actually BELIEVE that human beings are flawed, that the current type (which they are actively seeking to damage intellectually, physically, spiritually, etc.) should be modified to serve a new master race they are trying to develop - these people believe in man-machine interface and want to be immortal.**They are working on cloning to develop a single pointed servant class dumb enough to be controlled and made to serve in particular roles. ** Others won’t be allowed to be born - i.e., no one without a pre-ordered role will be allowed to be born. If these people have their way, that is.


#5

Human cloning is a sin.


#6

This is something of a contradiction.

I wouldn’t say that… Not the physical part anyway. The soul and the memory and the personality would not transfer.

Any way you look at it, cloning a human being is patently wrong, but I still interject my point that if it can be done… it will be. By some mad scientist, probably supported by Social Engineers in France.

:wink:


#7

Cloning a human being is essentially just manufacturing an identical twin after the fact. It’s 100% morally wrong and will absolutely happen in our lifetime.

It’s no more morally wrong than the IVF prodcedure by which human beings are manufactured in a petri dish routinely throughout wealthy countries already. Most people have zero issue with that now, so I see no enduring reason to expect that they will object to cloning.

Cloning is wrong because it is a dehumanizing technological approach to the origin of life that properly is reserved to the loving union of a husband and wife. Same exact reason that IVF is wrong.

The double horror of cloning is that people won’t clone themselves in order to have an identical twin. They’ll clone themselves in order to cook up a new heart, kidney, liver, cornea or whatever the need may be. They’ll figure out a way to scramble the brain of the fetus (not a “real” human, after all), but keep the body alive and growing until the organs are developed enough for harvesting. Watch and see.


#8

Well, there is the passage in Revelation about the “image” of the beast and how the second beast compels the people of the world to worship it. Often this passage is seen as parallel to Nebuchadnezzar’s great statue and how he forced the world to bow down to it except the three hebrew young men wouldn’t. Now in this modern age I’ve pondered the possibility that it is a clone. However, that being said, the Church doesn’t have an official position on it, and so I would hesitate to readily accept what has not been defined by the church. Don’t speculate too much, because there are already hundreds if not thousands of interpretations, each boasting that they alone are inspired by the Holy Spirit on this issue.


#9

Cloning of a human being would be a sin.

The interesting question would be that of the humanity of the clone. Is it a person independent and able to think for itself. Or is it just a science experiment?

We probably won’t know that until some mad scientist clones someone.


#10

a situation where a human is cloned for harvesting body parts is a case the ACLU would love to take in defense of the clone. a clone “created” here would be a US citizen, with all the rights and privileges of one, including the right not to be harvested. the genetic source wouldn’t own the clone either --13th amendment, among other reasons.

F/


#11

A close SHOULD have human rights, but if they are created, I’m sure the scientists will manage somehow to get them viewed as non-humans.


#12

Why’s that? away from the sci fi / fantasy world, this is a no-brainer. that child growing up is probably going to be most protected kid ever.

coning for parts is more likely … regrow just an arm or foot, for example.

F/


#13

[quote="Fairwinds, post:12, topic:324236"]
Why's that? away from the sci fi / fantasy world, this is a no-brainer. that child growing up is probably going to be most protected kid ever.

coning for parts is more likely ... regrow just an arm or foot, for example.

F/

[/quote]

I think you are looking at the possibilities of the future world with an optimistic lense. Would you ever guess, if you didn't see it yourself, that they would decide children in the womb aren't human? Or that the hundreds of thousands of frozen embryos in IVF factories are not human? To suggest that the world is not evil enough to use cloning to an evil end is to ignore history.


#14

[quote="dshix, post:13, topic:324236"]
I think you are looking at the possibilities of the future world with an optimistic lense. Would you ever guess, if you didn't see it yourself, that they would decide children in the womb aren't human? Or that the hundreds of thousands of frozen embryos in IVF factories are not human? To suggest that the world is not evil enough to use cloning to an evil end is to ignore history.

[/quote]

True...the chances are if we ever create human clones. It'll be for our use & abuse:
organ harvesting, slave labour etc...


#15

I like sci fi. I like history. but I can tell the difference between the two. abortion and infanticide have a history of thousands of years, its not surprising to me that abortion continues in modern days. in recent history, slavery was outlawed in most of the world.

your analogy is poor, but cutting up an adult human for parts is more like a form of slavery than it is a form of abortion (the clone could lose a leg and still live).

yeah, so I look at harvesting clones as sci fi, and not likely to happen in the real world, in the US, at least, anyway.

F/


#16

Thank you…

( See… I’m not “crazy” after all… ) :thumbsup:

And… I never claimed to be " inspired by the Holy Spirit on this issue "


#17

You overlook the “easy” way they will have around this that is already ACLU approved. Simply develop a way to scramble the brain of the cloned fetus in the womb while the fetus is still legally the mere chattle property of the mother. This will probably be done in the 8th month of pregnancy, when the organs are all substantially formed. After birth, the organism will be classified as “subhuman” for lack of adequate brain function to qualify as a “person” and the organs can be harvested.

Since Terry Schaivo, the legal principles are all settled law already. Just the arguments have to be made for this to start happening. We’re still a while away for it to happen without triggering public horror, just like it took 40-50 years of public acceptance of contraception to redefine marriage in a way that people will swallow calling gay relationships that are sterile by nature “marriage” and labeling those who object to that as “bigots.” Once the “brave new principles” are established, the behavior inevitably follows.


#18

[quote="manualman, post:17, topic:324236"]
You overlook the "easy" way they will have around this that is already ACLU approved. Simply develop a way to scramble the brain of the cloned fetus in the womb while the fetus is still legally the mere chattle property of the mother. This will probably be done in the 8th month of pregnancy, when the organs are all substantially formed. After birth, the organism will be classified as "subhuman" for lack of adequate brain function to qualify as a "person" and the organs can be harvested.

Since Terry Schaivo, the legal principles are all settled law already. Just the arguments have to be made for this to start happening. We're still a while away for it to happen without triggering public horror, just like it took 40-50 years of public acceptance of contraception to redefine marriage in a way that people will swallow calling gay relationships that are sterile by nature "marriage" and labeling those who object to that as "bigots." Once the "brave new principles" are established, the behavior inevitably follows.

[/quote]

like I said, I enjoy reading sci fi. I don't confuse it with reality.


#19

I’m not sure why you’re repeating that, because it is irrelevant to the discussion. sci-fi and reality are not mutually exclusive, and things in each can be found in both.

There is NO REASON to believe that someone will not dehumanize and use clones.


#20

Then you miss the point. The best sci-fi isn’t about the future, it’s commentary on the present.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.