How Unethical Do You Think Cloning of a Dead Dog Is?
 

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/16/wo...ce&oref=slogin


This California woman wants to clone her dead dog. I find it pathetic, and rather disturbing.

I think that's fucked.
As much as I've loved my past dogs, I would definitely not want them cloned. They wouldn't even be the same.

does she want a collection of dead dogs hanging around her house? maybe one day they'll wake up as zombies and eat her brains.

eh. live and let live.

I don't know if it's any creepier than people who have their dead pets taxidermied.

What would she do when the clone dies?

clone the clone?
it would just be exponentially imperfect/flawed versions of the same dog, like when you make a photocopy of a photocopy.

What I've read about this - for the $cuntload of money she's spending, there's only a 1 in 5 chance of the dog not dying in the petri dish.

Some people have more money than sense. Me, I've got about £1.47p's worth of each. It is British sterling though, and as such worth about twice the amount of American sense.

Morally, her doing it doesn't bother me; the moral ramifications of cloning are iffy, and the fact that it's being offered as a commercial service is concerning, but cloning isn't, to me, in itself a bad thing.

i dont really care
cloning is kinda cool but not as cool as time travel

OMG! that's so true, cause like, this one time i cloned myself because i had a lot of pressure at work and i was trying to save my marriage, and then i almost lost my wife-- to myself! overworked and overscheduled, i never had enough time for my wife and family. so when a helpful geneticist offered to "xerox" me, it seemed like the perfect solution-- until the clones began to take over my home, my job, and my bed. hilarious hijinks ensued.

fucking nuisance if you ask me...

why, foo? what disturbs you? never heard of twins?


ha ha ha ha ha exactly-- repped

It would be way cooler if she cloned her aborted fetus.

seriously, though, I don't have any ethical concerns with a lonely cow cloning her dog. she is pathetic and probably disturbing, but I have no issues with the technology of cloning. it could be useful. people keep dying of cancer, ya know.

boring. i thought you were leaving?

Oh, I was just on hiatus, smart guy.

hahaha.

cloning a dead dog, whats the point? we would just have another dead dog. then clone that one and after a few years we could renact the dawn of the dead..... but with zombie dogs, if we ever find the zombie gene that is........

Has anybody noticed the last couple of responses related to the thread are essentially "clones"?

Hehe, heh... Ah.

That is MORE creepy. Seriously, things only become unethical once humans start exploiting the living being, not when they engineer it so the living being has life.

I'm fine with it. Her therapist needs to make it clear to her that this is NOT the same dog, but if she has a thing for owning the same breed with the exact same markings, this might help.

The people who think cloning is some Huxleyian nightmare are just as misguided as those who expect it to work miracles. It'll probably be wealthy wackos in the latter category (like this woman) who initially drive the market to where we can all accept this as the normal technology it really is.

The only people who are against cloning are religious. They are against it because they don't want proof that humans can create other humans. Only God can do that.

There is nothing wrong with cloning. It can have lifesaving benefits. Read about it sometime

A whole lot of oversimplifications there. You'll find plenty of people who are against cloning for reasons other than religion, though I'd agree they often are ruled by dogmatism. There are just as many lefties against cloning as religious conservatives. Their argument is of course similar - that we shouldn't be messing with nature because nature knows best (and indeed, some, though not all of them would capitalized Nature as a diety).

Your other oversimplification is to say "there is nothing wrong with cloning". While I'm completely in favor of pursuing this biotechnology, that would be with the caveat that it be done very cautiously. Yes it can save lives, it can also open the door to mutated cells finding their way into our food supply, our medical treatments, and ultimately our gene pool. These are real, very serious, concerns that most scientists carefully work under. It is perfectly reasonable to have some non-extremist trepidation about the inevitable rogues who may not.

this is rather stupid than unethical or disturbing.

i'd clone my cat if it was cheap. he's got an awesome personality, which we know it's over 90% genetic. best cat EVER. unfortunately i adopted him de-nutted, which means he can't propagate his excellent genes. and he's not going to live forever, BUT I AM. so-- it makes perfect sense.

clones are genetically identical but have different personalities.

well i've known enought twins to know---yes i don't expect identical personalities (obviousy) but close enough. i'd clone the little bastard-- end of story. you can't stop me.

how selfish of you.

but hey, i'm not trying to stop anything.

selfishness is natural and healthy. i don't see you in line to be crucified.

Yes it is healthy be selfish. Repeat, "It is only me, there is on e in we but only I. And only I am the saviour of this world."

why dont you just buy a puppet? you would control it better.

being "the saviour of this world" is not selfish.

get your story straight

you can't control a cat, tarado. you basically work for him. but there are rewards.

Damn you, I was trying to go for the ego boost angle. What a party pooper.

the cloned cat is going to act differently, fool.

oy, bestia, yes, he will act differently but not so differently, any cat will act differently, but this one less than others, and that's good enough for me-- in any case you can't freeze time & every moment is unique and unrepeatable and that is why i am going to quit arguing this and go eat pancakes now.

thing is, nothing can garantee you the cat will act not so differently.

autoquote

So if I want to clone your mother for a sex slave you think that is morally ok? Actually, I'm going to clone 3 or 4 of her and keep them all tied up until I need them. Since they're just clones and not really humans and its not really your mother so you wouldn't care I guess. I might video tape it though to sell on the internet - or just give it away - but there's nothing wrong with that I guess.

I think there is nothing un ethical about it at all.

cloning a dog would create a brand new dog, like a twin of the other dog. it would be a puppy, you;'d love it and raise it and it would turn out different from the previous dog.

cloning is fucking awesome and I would do it for my dead kitty kat isabella if I knew where her body was.

cloning rules all.

many animals reproduce by cloning instead of sexual gene sharing, and nature digs it, why shouold humans and other animals not have that option?

clone away!

this is STUPID

if you clone a human it will take just as long for that clone to become adult as a regular baby. your argument is dumb as FUCK
by the time your "mopther" was old enough to fuck you would be 18 years older and maybe dead.

shit

people watch too many movies where clones are "rapidly grown"

dumb!!!!!