[Vision2020] Re: Cloning
Donovan Arnold
donovanarnold@hotmail.com
Sat, 20 Sep 2003 14:56:36 -0700
<html><div style='background-color:'><DIV>
<P>Robert,</P>
<P>I think you are taking it out of context. I agree that a cloned Tiger Woods could become a hermit or cab driver. However, Tiger Woods is combination of his experiences and DNA. If someone were to clone Tiger Woods they would most likely be doing it for someone or organization, or government that would intensely train the child from birth to be a golf player. Given the same DNA, more intense training, better equipment, that person would likely be better than Tiger Woods now. Just look at some others. For example Evil Knivel. He did great, but more intense training and better equipment made his son much better at stunts. Same goes with long lines of race car drivers and political families. A cloned 350 lb lineman is going to have a slight DNA advantage over a cloned swimmer when it comes to being a lineman in football, same goes for the 350 lb linebacker trying to be a swimmer. </P></DIV>
<P>"However, it does seem reasonable to protect people from being cloned without their permission."</P>
<DIV></DIV>
<P>How are you going to do this? Seal everyone in a bubble? How much would the Chinese government pay to get a hold of a hair left behind the top medalist in swimming? Probably enough to make a friend or acquaintance of them to grab a hair from their comb and mail it to them. Especially if the person who got their DNA stolen might not know until 15-25 years later.</P>
<DIV></DIV>
<P>Further, what are you going to do about it? Kill the clone? I don't think so. Are you going to declare war on another nation for stealing DNA? No, there is no possible way to stop it from happening. Once the technology exists, it will start happening. The best thing to do is to slow down the technology.</P>
<DIV></DIV>
<P>"A cloned child would have a completely independent identity. It would not assume the identity of the 'father'."</P>
<DIV></DIV>
<P>I disagree. I am more and more like my parents every day :). But seriously, me and mom even have some of the same dreams. Rather odd, but I happen think that DNA plays a heavy role in how we are as people. Twins are different than clones. Twins are usually considered equal in families and they are the same age. A child clone would see their father or mother as themselves knowing what is expected of them and how they will likely look. It is like looking at what you could be 30 years older. Twins cannot do that, they cannot make that connection. Also, twins don't have legal authority over each other. Parents would likely assume that their clone is thinking the same things they were. I think it would suck big time if my parents knew everything I was thinking about before I did. Finally, twins are both originals. One is not made from the other, they are created at the same time. A clone would see themselves as copies, seconds, made in the image o!
f another person. Twins don't feel like they are zerox of the same person, they were made at the same time as equals. </P>
<DIV></DIV>
<P>The bottom line is that there is a reason why each new birth gives a certain amount of genetic diversity. I think it is wrong to get rid of the diversity. If our species was intended to make clones we would be able to do it like some species can. The advantages of cloning are outweighed by the advantages of diversity.</P>
<DIV></DIV>
<P>Donovan J Arnold<BR><BR></P>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>From: "Robert Dickow" <DICKOW@UIDAHO.EDU>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>To: <VISION2020@MOSCOW.COM>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Re: Cloning
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 12:16:29 -0700
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>Some random thoughts and rantings on cloning:
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>A clone of Tiger Woods would just as likely develop into a hermit, a
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>sheep-herder, a policeman, a French horn player, or a brain surgeon with
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>probably more likelyhood than becoming another virtuoso golf pro. But with
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>some luck he might become a half-decent horn player, which would in fact be
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>a Good Thing.
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>However, it does seem reasonable to protect people from being cloned without
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>their permission.
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>A cloned child would have a completely independent identity. It would not
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>assume the identity of the 'father'. It would be as independent as an
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>identical twin is in the family unit. Natural identical twins do not feel
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>that they have been wronged or damaged because they happen to have a twin.
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>Twins even typically end up having different looks, food preferences,
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>hobbies, etc. A clone is NOT another one of YOU, although this is a
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>recognized popular misconception concerning the nature of clones.
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> > The problem with messing with animals
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> >is that we end up limiting the gene pool of
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> >animals to fit only human needs and put the
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> >species at risk of extinction when we find
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> >something better and don't need them anymore.
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>Well, we have been limiting the gene pool to suite humans since the time of
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>Adam and Eve (for about 10,000 years in other words). Corn (maize) is a
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>plant that never existed in nature in its current form. We don't even know
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>what its natural origins are any more!!
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>There is potentially an issue regarding bio-diversity, but only if you
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>assume that cloned populations will replace regular ones (i.e. natural cross
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>breeding.) These issues are easily addressed (as in the handling of forest
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>stock using cloned material) Given the history of commercial use of cloned
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>plant material, it is very evident that there has been no reduction of
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>standard breeding methods or any real threat to bio-diversity. Indeed, the
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>commercial availability of clones in orchids, for example, has furthered and
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>indeed increased the sexual cross breeding of new stock of superior
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>parentage. Cloning in orchids has also reduced pressure on natural
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>populations because people can acquire superb varieties without having to
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>import jungle collected specimens. There is no basis whatsoever for thinking
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>that cloned animals would risk extinctions of anything. Non sequitor.
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> > Third, you would have ego maniacs
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> >cloning themselves. Do we really want
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> >another 8 Michael Jacksons, Bill Clintons,
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> >and George Bushs? I sure don't
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>While I might not enjoy seeing more George Bushs prancing around, I doubt
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>this would be a real problem other than it being unsightly at times. There
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>might be a few foolhearty enough to pursue this, but who the heck cares?
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>Certainly the novelty would wear off after people discover that their clone
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>is NOTHING like them except perhaps in some superficial resemblances.
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>Michael Jackson would probably lose his clone out some window anyway.
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>To rant on with no particular reference to the original message...
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>The dream of our society building an army of clones of Arnold Schwarzenegger
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>just simply would not happen, because it can't work. Some of the Arnolds
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>will probably not even become muscle-building afficianados, preferring
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>instead to raise longhorn steer in Texas as a lifelong calling (maybe cloned
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>ones though.... uh oh). Many of the Arnolds will prefer a political career
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>no doubt. To think and argue that we as a society would enslave all the
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>Arnolds to become meta-soldiers in such a scenario is fanciful Orwellian
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>thinking at best.
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>Despite my assertions here, I do feel there are plenty of ethical questions
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>that need to be adressed when it comes to human cloning. I wouldn't want
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>anybody to think I was trying to say that 'anything goes' when it comes to
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>cloning. The thought that society would probably not be enthusiastic to
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>clone a bunch of Bob Dickows is very disappointing for me, frankly.
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>Bob Dickow (who obviously has a few extra minutes of spare time this
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>morning)
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>----- Original Message -----
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>From: "Donovan Arnold" <DONOVANARNOLD@HOTMAIL.COM>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> > LuJane,
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> > It was me, not Dale that first brought this up. Dale is a Libertarian I
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>think, have to ask him.
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> > My objections are not so much with the cloning of animals, although I am
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>for other reasons. It is the building of the technology to clone humans.
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> > If you could clone humans this would disastrous to many people. First, a
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>child would not have their own identity, it would belong to their father.
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>This is unfair and wrong to that child.
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> > Second, it would lead to identity theft of many people. People could steal
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>a lock of hair from a famous athlete and clone them so they could make money
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>off the child. 100,000's of parents already try to train their children to
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>be pro-tennis, basketball, and golf players. Imagine if they could get DNA
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>from Tiger Woods.
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> > Third, you would have ego maniacs cloning themselves. Do we really want
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>another 8 Michael Jacksons, Bill Clintons, and George Bushs? I sure don't.
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> > Fourth, you would see other people we don't want to see, like the cloning
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>of Adolph Hitler, Lenin, and Pol Pot.
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> > Finally, people would use it to clone parts for themselves. Kill the brain
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>stem at an early age, and grow arms, legs, and other parts.
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> > The problem with messing with animals is that we end up limiting the gene
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>pool of animals to fit only human needs and put the species at risk of
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>extinction when we find something better and don't need them anymore.
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> > I see lots of problems that can be created. Even if the US and most of
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>European nations make it illegal, it doesn't stop people from doing it in
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>other countries that see a benefit in stealing DNA from others.
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> > Donovan J Arnold
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> > >From: "Tom Hansen"
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> > >
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> > >I believe this brings up a very interesting question:
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> > >
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> > >Is it the actual conduct of cloning animals (mules or humans) or the
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>reasons
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> > >(which may validate or invalidate clining) for the research that evolves
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> > >into cloning of animals which become ethically (or otherwise)
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>objectionable
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> > >to some? Simply put: Does the ends justify the means?
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>_____________________________________________________
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> List services made available by First Step Internet,
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> http://www.fsr.net
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>> mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV></div><br clear=all><hr> <a href="http://g.msn.com/8HMBENUS/2755??PS=">Help protect your PC. Get a FREE computer virus scan online from McAfee.</a> </html>