would that clone have a soul and would god love him?if the clone was brought up in a lab by some scientist it would mean the scientist is the clones god, how upset would god be about this?woud he let the clone enter heaven or hell?would the clone just get stuck somewhere between life and the afterlife like in some sort of warp zone or some shit.
if a human was to be cloned...
- Thread starter askG
- Start date
What kind of "cloning" is this??
Is this sci-fi, clone the person at the exact same age, nonsense??
Or is this using someone's dna to recreate the same physical traits in a new fetus, which will grow at the same rate as a normal human being?
A clone is just a twin. Only difference is that this twin is not the same age.
No, this would not mean that the scientist is the clone's God. The scientist simply uses laws in order to get a certain result. Just like when your mom and dad used laws of intercourse leading to insemination in order to conceive you. That does not make them God.
Would a clone have a soul? Soul means living entity. Does a twin have a soul?
Clone just means to duplicate the physical traits. There is the soul, and there is the body. Two completely separate things.
Is this sci-fi, clone the person at the exact same age, nonsense??
Or is this using someone's dna to recreate the same physical traits in a new fetus, which will grow at the same rate as a normal human being?
A clone is just a twin. Only difference is that this twin is not the same age.
No, this would not mean that the scientist is the clone's God. The scientist simply uses laws in order to get a certain result. Just like when your mom and dad used laws of intercourse leading to insemination in order to conceive you. That does not make them God.
Would a clone have a soul? Soul means living entity. Does a twin have a soul?
Clone just means to duplicate the physical traits. There is the soul, and there is the body. Two completely separate things.
i didnt mean the sci fi same age type of thing...
to me it would seem though that intercourse is a natural thing intended to procreate, but if youre taking somebodys cells or genes or whatever you need to clone, and you do it like some laboratory science project, it doesnt seem thats the way things were intended...science is always out to prove religion wrong, to prove god doesnt exist, to me the bottom line is that humans were meant to be bred from sex, not from experiments...and another thing is, life is beautiful from the get go, for women giving labor, its excrutiating pain, but once that kid is out, the joy the parents have is tremendous, you raise a clone in a jar, it sucks out the whole birth experience, its like an emotionless birth, to me it almost seems like they would be creating robots but with emotions, skin and bones.
twins who are born naturally is a different thing, i dont think anyone plans to have twins except for those idiots taking hormones to having a better chance at quantuplets, but creating a clone and calling him Exhibit A's "twin" isnt the way it was supposed to be.
i hope that clears up my opinions and questions a little better.
to me it would seem though that intercourse is a natural thing intended to procreate, but if youre taking somebodys cells or genes or whatever you need to clone, and you do it like some laboratory science project, it doesnt seem thats the way things were intended...science is always out to prove religion wrong, to prove god doesnt exist, to me the bottom line is that humans were meant to be bred from sex, not from experiments...and another thing is, life is beautiful from the get go, for women giving labor, its excrutiating pain, but once that kid is out, the joy the parents have is tremendous, you raise a clone in a jar, it sucks out the whole birth experience, its like an emotionless birth, to me it almost seems like they would be creating robots but with emotions, skin and bones.
twins who are born naturally is a different thing, i dont think anyone plans to have twins except for those idiots taking hormones to having a better chance at quantuplets, but creating a clone and calling him Exhibit A's "twin" isnt the way it was supposed to be.
i hope that clears up my opinions and questions a little better.
However it is done, it is working under the same laws. None of this disproves God, it actually further proves that we work under His laws. In cloning, the scientists would be using someone's genetics in order to control how the individual's body will look. It is pointless to clone people. Just to say, "look what we can do!!" Fuckin childish.
They can't prove God wrong. However humans are bred, it is done using the same laws. Whether it is a couple having sex, or they take the egg and sperm in a dish, fertilize, and then put into the woman, the same process is being used.
Who says we would grow clones in jars??
I am pretty sure that the cloned fetus would grow within the womb of a woman like any other fetus.
Yeah, there would be no need to grow a fetus in a jar. That is just ridiculous. The mother's womb is the perfect "jar", supplied by nature. Scientists are getting awards for doing things that nature does billions of times over. If a scientist learns how to imitate the barking of a dog, then masses of idiots will praise him/her, even though there are dogs naturally barking all over the place.
Cloning is simply narrowing down the control we have on the bodily traits of the entity. There is some control naturally because the offspring will hold certain traits of the mother and others of the father. Cloning is just taking the physical traits of one person and duplicating them. That "duplicate" is a completely different person. But bottomline, there is no necessity for cloning humans.
They can't prove God wrong. However humans are bred, it is done using the same laws. Whether it is a couple having sex, or they take the egg and sperm in a dish, fertilize, and then put into the woman, the same process is being used.
Who says we would grow clones in jars??
I am pretty sure that the cloned fetus would grow within the womb of a woman like any other fetus.
Yeah, there would be no need to grow a fetus in a jar. That is just ridiculous. The mother's womb is the perfect "jar", supplied by nature. Scientists are getting awards for doing things that nature does billions of times over. If a scientist learns how to imitate the barking of a dog, then masses of idiots will praise him/her, even though there are dogs naturally barking all over the place.
Cloning is simply narrowing down the control we have on the bodily traits of the entity. There is some control naturally because the offspring will hold certain traits of the mother and others of the father. Cloning is just taking the physical traits of one person and duplicating them. That "duplicate" is a completely different person. But bottomline, there is no necessity for cloning humans.
i didnt mean in cloned in a jar literally.
and i didnt mean for it to disprove gods existence, i guess i threw it in there because of the irrelevant shit science spends its time on...like you said, there is no need to clone a human, but i garuantee you there are hundreds of scientists who would jump at the opportunity.
and i didnt mean for it to disprove gods existence, i guess i threw it in there because of the irrelevant shit science spends its time on...like you said, there is no need to clone a human, but i garuantee you there are hundreds of scientists who would jump at the opportunity.