Human Cloning Foundation Hails British Scientists
The Benefits of
All the Reasons to
Clone Human Beings
The Top Ten Myths
about Human Cloning
Human Cloning is the Cure for Infertility
Past Books of the Month
John Kunich's Books
Illegal Beings: Human Clones
Re: A Superstitious View -boundlesslife ( 06/15/2005, 20:27:16 )
Discussing libfemme's remarks:(libfemme): I can only assume that AArooon1 is sincere. That he/she actually believes that souless humans can be actually come to life. Which begs the question what is the soul then if it has nothing to do with giving life? But beyond that, what really strikes me is that believing in the existence of a God who would cause monsters to exist, AAroon1 then goes on to actually worship such person. Why?"(Comment There are other parts of libfemme's comments that get into why AAroon1 would want to "worship" anyone or anything, but first, about the "soul": When we ask those who claim to have one, "What is it?" they will generally say, in addition to referring to some non-scientific fantasies (such as: you can't have life without a 'soul'), that it's an essence of self ("you") that is stable, relatively permanent, and survives death. Setting aside religious interpretations, which have no foundation other than the claims of mystics as to entities that presumably "manage souls", there is only one thing we have that comes anywhere close to this, and that is our genome. It is there with us from birth to death, a hundred trillion or so copies of it, relatively changeless, despite our various occupational difficulties or changes in personal relationships. Preserve it, especially in such a way as to make cloning possible, and your "soul" has "survived death". No "pearly gates" required.(Comment continued Metaphorically speaking, this would suggest that we might refer to same-genome persons (we just have called them "identical twins", in the past) as "soul mates", wouldn't it? There seems to be some basis for this. Studies of twins with the same genome have remarkable likenesses of personality and intuitively understand each other very well. Without going into depth on this, it is perhaps worth noting that identical twins understand each other so well, probably by way of body language and facial expressions, that they develop language skills a bit more slowly than others. It's not much of a handicap, but parents of identical twins need to take this and many other "twin-particular" characteristics into account. When we use the term "soul mate" we generally have the idea that the two persons understand each other very well, so the usage fits (in addition to being used for couples who have reached a very high level of mutual understanding without the need of identical genomes).(Comment continued Society is going to change a lot, as cures for aging are discovered, and death may finally dwindle to a small fragment of what it always been, for example, that at any moment, on a freeway (or what they become) a sudden accident could reduce a person to "bug-juice", or that a random, insane terrorist attack could abruptly end many lives. It's just my way of looking at things, of course, but at such a moment, if the genomes of those lost exist nowhere else, so far as I'm concerned their "souls" are utterly lost; "gone forever"!(Comment continued In the context of a future where no one grows old anymore, but where people do still die once in a while, and leave behind an anguished network of family and friends who would rather "have them back with what amounts to a case of amnesia, than not at all", that might be worth a little thought. How does cloning fit into this? It ought to be obvious. How will the viewpoints of such an age differ from those of today's world? We can't say for sure, but they are likely to be very, very different! In other words, what seems to strike you as reasonable and obvious today may well be regarded as archaic and senseless, 100 years from now.*** on with libfemme's remarks ***(libfemme): I mean if God is all powerful, as most Christians I know usually define Him, then He can alleviate this monster-making problem with a wave of his hand, metaphorically speaking. So why doesn't he?(Comment This kind of thing is discussed a lot on the Beliefnet Board at http://www.beliefnet.com/boards/index.asp. Another Board where you'll see a lot about the characteristics ascribed to God is the Forum at http://www.infidels.org/index.html. My only comment here is that a challenge to the power of God and His willingness to act should be secondary to the challenge of the very existence of such an entity. We might ask why Zeus of the Romans or Marduk of the Greeks don't prevent evil in the world, or why it is not prevented by a Green Goblin on the back side of the moon? Who has disproved that any of these exist, and might not be called upon by prayer to change what will happen?(libfemme): Aren't people judged by the actions they take? Then why not judge a supernatural being the same way? If a person who intentionally creates a monster is evil, then why would you let a God get away with the identical act and not call foul? It can't be out of fear of angering a supernatural being, because we have no qualms about calling Satan evil. We freely judge his actions by a moral standard, why not God's?(Comment I agree! FOUL! FOUL! NO FAIR! GOD DOESN'T PLAY BY THE RULES! (Wait, some will say, he made the rules! But who can give any convincing proof of that, anyway? And, why should we believe them? The fact that they no longer torture non-believers with the rack and burn them at the stake has seriously undermined their power-base. So, on the next observation by libfemme(libfemme): If God is in fact the creator of the world and all that is in it, then God is responsible for everything that happens. God has the ability to right any wrong he so desires. And if he does not desire to right a wrong, what can you call that but evil itself?(Comment): The way this is generally put is that if God is all-powerful (omnipotent), all-knowing (omniscient), and all good, then he can see an evil event prior to its occurrence and prevent it, and if he lack the power, or the knowledge, or the will (which would make him malevolent) then he cannot be God, by the definition. So unless you are willing to put up with a God who is weak, or dumb, or wicked, you are stuck with the difficulty of explaining why he doesn't keep things "good". It doesn't help to talk about "original sin" and "God judging people, based on their free will and sin". This is just so much razzle-dazzle cooked up by priests over thousands years of operating their "businesses", to keep people confused.(libfemme): The Bible claims that man is made in the image of God. Man is judged by his actions, so should God be. Either He is responsible for this situation in which case He does not deserve adoration any more than Satan would, or He is not all powerful in which case He is not God.(Comment) : I'm running out of things to add to what libfemme is saying, which are in many ways simpler and easier to understand that what I've said. I really like the way she says what she's said above.(libfemme): I would not tread on the private beliefs of AArooon1 or anyone else so long as they remained private, but since he/she has dained to make public statements about us I feel the field is open in return.(Comment): I'm glad libfemme said that, because I've done a bit of "treading" myself. However, I haven't even begun to say what I'd like to, about the way the early Christian fanatics assassinated Hypatia in Alexandria, about a year before they burned the library there, destroying over seven hundred years of the history of humankind's thinking. And, I'm not very happy, either, about the way they burned Bruno at the stake for his views about the nature of distant stars as possibly being suns, perhaps with planets, with the still-existing church never having so much as apologized for it. No need here to go into other aspects of the Inquisition, and the fact that if there were a God, He would surely have sent all of the Inquisitors to an "everlasting burning Hell", along with all of those who followed in their footsteps, maintaining their particular faith up to this present day. (This posting has to end somewhere, and this is as good a place as any!)
This Message is being posted for educational purposes, as well as for comment and criticism, by the visitors to the HumanCloning.org Foundation website (www.HumanCloning.org ).
Disclaimer: Information provided on this web site is for educatonal purposes only. It is not a substitute for, nor can it replace advice from your own physician.
HumanCloning.org™ Established December 11, 2002.
Who's Afraid of Human Cloning?
Disease Prevention and Treatment