Let’s get this out of the way: this has nothing to due with cloning humans. Assume that only animals are being cloned and that no human DNA is being used in the process. Would it be morally wrong to clone animals?
Personally, I think it is not morally wrong. By basis for this is in the first book of Genesis.
Genesis 1:26 And he said: “Let us make Man to our image and likeness. And let him rule over the fish of the sea, and the flying creatures of the air, and the wild beasts, and the entire earth, and every animal that moves on the earth.”
Genesis 1:28 And God blessed them, and he said, “Increase and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it, and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and the flying creatures of the air, and over every living thing that moves upon the earth.”
If you agree or disagree with my stance, please post your reasons for agreeing or disagreeing.
I personally think it shows an unhealthy desire for power…to be “god-like”. We were given dominion over the animals, that’s true. We can use them for food, clothing, as helpers/companions, and for research to help humans (although some of this crosses the line, in my opinion to torture/mistreatment of animals). But to try to recreate an animal…I think it is both unnecessary and is a symptom of wanting to be “god-like”. It’s only a hop, skip, and a jump away from becoming like Baron Von Frankenstein.
Animals do not have the right to parents, as do humans.
Moreover, there is a place for research, including cloning, in the vegetable and animal kingdoms, wherever it answers a need or provides a significant benefit for man or for other living beings, provided that the rules for protecting the animal itself and the obligation to respect the biodiversity of species are observed.
Despite your disclaimer before you posed the questions, I would say it depends…
We could ask the same “cloning of animals” with “killing of people”, and have the same “it depends” as a response.
Murder and abortion would be wrong…Capital punishment and war might (emphasis on might) make killing permissible.
So, while no human DNA is used, as you pre-suppose, there are other questionable objections arising…one being the one raised by another poster who said, it would be objectionable if the purpose was to show the power of man in the creative process, instead of God.
The objection that came to my mind, which I would think would be sinful, would be if the cloning of animals was not just to clone and animal but to use the data and findings to apply to the attempts, later, of cloning people.
I find this a really compelling topic, as someone who works in the biotech industry, and as a Catholic who has to be vigilant to ensure the jobs I take do not conflict with natural law and Church teachings.
So, let’s get back to the taboo of cloning humans…does this prohibition also apply, in the minds of those reading this thread, to the cloning of human tissue and organs? The reason I ask this question is, the viability of the soul is as concerning as the viability of life…we claim life begins at conception, and the soul inhabits the human body…but what of the soul…cloning does not entail conception…does a cloned body have a soul…does cloned human tissue have a soul?
I do think it is a sin, as it is acting like God. It is also too easy to make the next step to humans, an unfortunate reality that has occurred time and again. I see no reason to do this, especially since cellular “cloning” can occur without having to use anything but that specific tissue desired. We don’t need to create whole new animals for the sake of experimentation.
Cloned human organs would not have a soul. Attempts are being made now to regrow certain organs using the patient’s own cells as building blocks. A few hurdles have been overcome, and there is one success that I’m aware of.
Humans have been domesticating animals since the upper Paleolithic era. How is animal husbandry/ artificial selection different from cloning animals?
It would not be to show off our power, it would be for practical purposes. Extinct animals would be recreated and returned to their environment. Large amounts of food would be created from cattle. Extinct Animals from a different era (Mammoths, dinosaurs, etc.) will be easier to learn about if they can be reproduced.
God gave us dominion over animals, so I don’t think it would be sinful to act within that dominion.
Also, in response to a previous comment, yes cloned humans would have souls. For the same reason identical twins have individual souls.
So, what parts, or what percentage of an entire human has a soul. The heart, the brain, half a body, all or nothing?
It we say a cloned human has a soul, only if the whole body is cloned, then we have to reflect on the unborn who through formation in the womb do not develop certain organs, or a whole body…they surely have a soul, do they not?
I don’t know the answer, just wonder what everyone else thinks.
I think cloning a animal would be a venial sin, against the First Commandment. Since God is the author of creation, not us. Also the animal is created by unnatural methods as well. Cloning a human could be a mortal sin?
God gave us dominion over animals (read Genesis if you don’t believe me), so He authorized us use them how we see fit so long as we are not abusive. I think this includes the authorization to produce animals from the DNA of other animals.