Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[TheBiggerFish]

non-theraputic cloning (eg, reproductive cloning) is illegal in the US, the UK, and many eurozone countries.

Why?  beats the shit out of me. some argument about slippery slopes most likely.

Ugh.  That's silly.

[Descan]

The problem with the whole argument about "is it human at birth or at conception?" is that, even if a fetus were a human, we already have consent laws regarding using one persons body, even a dead persons body, to sustain another persons body. Organ donation is opt-in, you can't be forced to give blood, etc.

One could argue that consent is given to sustain the fetus by engaging in the reproductive act. But that too has been covered, more or less, by sexual assault cases, where-in the victim consented originally but then withdrew consent, and that counts. They need to stop after that or else it's assault. I see no reason not to extend this to the same "sex is consent" metaphor re: consent to sustain a fetus/human in your womb/bank account for 9 months/18 years.

That's just one way to argue the "grey areas," and that it doesn't just come down to "when is it human?"

[Loud Whispers]

non-theraputic cloning (eg, reproductive cloning) is illegal in the US, the UK, and many eurozone countries.

Why?  beats the shit out of me. some argument about slippery slopes most likely.

Ugh.  That's silly.

Yup, some combination of hitler, frankenstein and stalin

[wierd]

In the US, there is also the possibility of fear mongering over the re-creation of hitler via cloning.

Who needs zombie hitler, when you can have Mini-Hitler 2.0 instead!

[TheBiggerFish]

In the US, there is also the possibility of fear mongering over the re-creation of hitler via cloning.

Who needs zombie hitler, when you can have Mini-Hitler 2.0 instead!

...Seriously?
Ugh.
I feel like slapping everybody who thinks that a clone of Hitler would inevitably re-enact WWII.
They would not have had anywhere near the same experiences that drove original!Hitler to be, well, Hitler.

[wierd]

The general US public is not terribly well known for its science literacy, Big Fish.

Sadly.

[TheBiggerFish]

The general US public is not terribly well known for its science literacy, Big Fish.

Sadly.

xkcd should be required reading for US all students.

[smjjames]

In the US, there is also the possibility of fear mongering over the re-creation of hitler via cloning.

Who needs zombie hitler, when you can have Mini-Hitler 2.0 instead!

...Seriously?
Ugh.
I feel like slapping everybody who thinks that a clone of Hitler would inevitably re-enact WWII.
They would not have had anywhere near the same experiences that drove original!Hitler to be, well, Hitler.

One word: Brainwashing.

Even THEN though, the geopolitical situation and well, everything, is different from Hitlers time.

[Loud Whispers]

yay brainwashing

[RedKing]

And that's the great thing about that kind of argument. If you begin with arbitrary suppositions that bolster your argument, the argument virtually makes itself. The intellectual debate over abortion is primarily a debate over that supposition -- when does life begin?

But pro-lifers take the supposition as hard fact and argue from there, with the obvious result that it paints pro-choicers as callous murderers.

You say that like a more logical place to define the beginning of life exists. There does not. They are all equally arbitrary.

Actually, nowhere did I say that. I said that they are taking an arbitrary point and arguing it as hard fact. It is not a medical fact, it is a philosophical position.

[smjjames]

The issue I see here, is that trying to assert "can survive outside the womb" as the meter stick can run into some nasty consequences later down the line.

Take for instance, if reproductive medicine is able to create genuine artificial wombs-- say, for same-sex couples, such as homosexual males.  Since this hypothetical technology is able to sustain a fetus from conception to full term, without ever even being inside a (human) womb, the pro-life crowd instantly wins. Women need not be involved in the process at all if they wish, and the fetus can still survive.

This is where the argument about "convenience" comes in-- forcing somebody to either cary or pay for the continued gestation of another human, that they really cannot afford.  The pro choice crowd would say that it is inherently immoral to force somebody into that position. The pro life crowd would say it is inherently immoral to terminate a perfectly good human life over money concerns.

Sensible policy makers should cut the bullshit-- literally-- and focus on how even in such a far off future context, the issue can be resolvable.  In this case, streamlining fetal adoption so that legal custody and authority can be quickly and readily transferred, for the benefit of the child.

Like it or not, with organ printing technology on the horizon, the prospect of a functional synthetic womb is becoming less and les science fiction. It isn't wrong to consider it in policy decisions.

Politicians aren't exactly known for foresight. Yes, there can be politicians who have good foresight, but in general, not typically.

[Baffler]

And that's the great thing about that kind of argument. If you begin with arbitrary suppositions that bolster your argument, the argument virtually makes itself. The intellectual debate over abortion is primarily a debate over that supposition -- when does life begin?

But pro-lifers take the supposition as hard fact and argue from there, with the obvious result that it paints pro-choicers as callous murderers.

You say that like a more logical place to define the beginning of life exists. There does not. They are all equally arbitrary.

Actually, nowhere did I say that. I said that they are taking an arbitrary point and arguing it as hard fact. It is not a medical fact, it is a philosophical position.

Didn't you?

But pro-lifers take the supposition as hard fact and argue from there, with the obvious result that it paints pro-choicers as callous murderers.

But pro-lifers take the supposition as hard fact and argue from there

But pro-lifers

Surely "your side" would never do something so dishonest as taking a definite position on a contentious issue.

[Bauglir]

One of the biggest reasons I choose to define conception as the starting point is because, if an objective truth exists (also debatable, but something needs to be decided on legally at this point so an objective truth might as well exist for our purposes), there is no possible way for me to have called it too early.

Hang on, isn't the conclusion that there's no possible way for you to have called it too late? I might be missing something, but isn't the usual argument of that kind that, by choosing the earliest possible time, there's no risk of having chosen it so late that innocent lives were, in fact, killed?

or am i just bad at parsing words

[Baffler]

One of the biggest reasons I choose to define conception as the starting point is because, if an objective truth exists (also debatable, but something needs to be decided on legally at this point so an objective truth might as well exist for our purposes), there is no possible way for me to have called it too early.

Hang on, isn't the conclusion that there's no possible way for you to have called it too late? I might be missing something, but isn't the usual argument of that kind that, by choosing the earliest possible time, there's no risk of having chosen it so late that innocent lives were, in fact, killed?

or am i just bad at parsing words

No, I definitely just made a ridiculous typo and completely inverted the meaning of my post.

[SalmonGod]

non-theraputic cloning (eg, reproductive cloning) is illegal in the US, the UK, and many eurozone countries.

Why?  beats the shit out of me. some argument about slippery slopes most likely.

I'm sure this isn't the primary reason for many, but I personally agree with the ban, at least for the time being, due to the unacceptably high risk of producing fuck-ups that would suffer horribly.  As I understand, we still produce many short-lived failures for every successfully cloned animal.