Animal-Human Embryos Deserve Human Rights

I stumbled upon this, and i must have been living under a rock because i had no idea that animal-human embryo research was actually going to be allowed to happen.

Apparently Bishops are saying that these "things" deserve human rights?!? What the hell is going on?

animal-human embryos

Scientists are making Frankencreations and calling it "all in the name of science."

Instead of using stem cells to create human parts which I think is even a bit drastic, scientists are using animal and human DNA to create new creatures?

They think they're God. Great, just what we need more scientists with a God-complex.

What happened to Bush's anti-stem cell research law? He doesn't like stem cells, but he allows scientists to create "things" as you called them so eloquently hikix (no sarcasm by the way I agree with you).

Nevermind, its London...But still. My point still stands.

[edit on 30-6-2007 by biggie smalls]

Wow that is scary. I had always suspected tests like this go on, but I havn't seen any news articles about it. I don't think too many women are going to be to excited about having chimera babies.

Ok, here's a question.

Why does an Embryo, regardless of what species it comes from need Human Rights?

I mean it can't think, it is virtually nothing more than a parasite for the most part.


Anyways, these embryos are only allowed to develop to a certain stage, they are not
allowed to be implanted to be born, and even if they were they would either die before
or shortly after birth in some cases and in others would be virtually no different than
whatever animal they are based on since the Human part is an incredibly miniscule cellular
part that has no bearing on the development of the animal once it would be born.

I plug ethics and "animal-human embryos" into the biological computer known as uberarcanist and immediately I am greeted with the critical stop error. I don't know what to make of it. But seriously, folks. It seems to me that Anglicans are more vain than your usual churchfolk and love to say or do something that grabs the headlines, and this is no exception.

I heard a something like "In fifty years we will be arguing about what it means to be human due to all the alterations that we have made to ourselves" from somewhere.

This article verifies that is a possiblity.

Neat.

Originally posted by Brxan
I heard a something like "In fifty years we will be arguing about what it means to be human due to all the alterations that we have made to ourselves" from somewhere.

This article verifies that is a possiblity.

Neat.

I wouldn't jump to conclusions yet. Major modifications may be impossible because of our immune systems, for one, and it's highly unlikely these embryos would survive their entire gestation cycle.

This breeds the question "when does it stop". Who knows what the hell is going on in these laboratories. They may start with embryos but you know damn well that someone somewhere will try to, for lack of better words, make "something grow up". God knows if this has already happened, but this is a matter of man playing god and it really is a step in the wrong direction. I truly believe that they are using the mask of treating disease to experiment.

This really makes me wonder how advanced we have gotten in the past few years. We've been around for tens of thousands of years (who the hell knows) and accomplished relatively nothing until the past 50 years. Something had to have an outside influence (hint hint ET's).

I love the idea of human-animal hybrids I wish there were chimera people in society right now. If they are conscious...of course they should get 'human rights'.

In fact, I think we should drop the whole 'human rights' thing and replace it with 'sentient rights'

Originally posted by uberarcanist

Originally posted by Brxan
I heard a something like "In fifty years we will be arguing about what it means to be human due to all the alterations that we have made to ourselves" from somewhere.

This article verifies that is a possiblity.

Neat.

I wouldn't jump to conclusions yet. Major modifications may be impossible because of our immune systems, for one, and it's highly unlikely these embryos would survive their entire gestation cycle.

You should read up on all the scientific advancements pertinent to the transhumanist movement. I think you would recalculate the 'likelihood' of what Brxan is saying after that.

Would you marry one?

Well, i have nothing against it, but doing research with primitive technology can lead to a lot of suffering.

Originally posted by sb2012
Would you marry one?

If I found it sexually attractive, yes.

However, I don't see why that matters? They can't be members of society if we don't want to have sex with them?

Well, i have nothing against it, but doing research with primitive technology can lead to a lot of suffering.

Primitive technology?

I wish my children could be born with gills

and able to see in the dark.

Retractable claws would be good too.

I've started a thread on it here.

[edit on 1-7-2007 by Astyanax]

This really isn't much different from spider genes into cows and hamsters to get the silk (spider webs) in greater quantities. 1% human doesn't equal out to a human being nor does it mean the cells deserve human rights. 1% isn't enough to change much at all really, it just shows they can do it.

Originally posted by Jenna
This really isn't much different from spider genes into cows and hamsters to get the silk (spider webs) in greater quantities. 1% human doesn't equal out to a human being nor does it mean the cells deserve human rights. 1% isn't enough to change much at all really, it just shows they can do it.

I agree with this. That's why I was saying it should be changed to 'sentient rights' instead of 'human rights'.

If you are consciously aware then you can most likely contribute to society, thus deserving personal rights.

Originally posted by Cloak and Dagger

Well, i have nothing against it, but doing research with primitive technology can lead to a lot of suffering.

Primitive technology?

Yes, any technology less than nano, zero-point and anti-gravity is basically stone age tech.

Most of stuff is already done, except nano assemblers i think.

[edit on 1-7-2007 by sb2012]

I'm all for chimeras and genetic engineering. If global warming is going to be a serious problem, we may need to genetically alter life. Shouldn't we get some practice before taking on something that big? If humantiy is going to survive another 1000 years, I can't see how we're not going to "create".

I believe it was the David Brin who said,

If someone alters an ape to speak and act like a man, who is going to say, "Turn him back the way he was"?

I think he also said that once we are capable of "shaping" life, the leading cause for altered animals will be the loneliness of mankind.

As for human rights, like a previous post, 1% doesn't qualify human. Look at chimpanzees, don't we share something like 98% DNA or something? And they're not even altered. I guess we could be though...

Originally posted by Cloak and Dagger
I love the idea of human-animal hybrids

I wish there were chimera people in society right now. If they are conscious...of course they should get 'human rights'.

In fact, I think we should drop the whole 'human rights' thing and replace it with 'sentient rights'

I'm with you. But not "sentient rights", there are lots of sentient creatures on the planet right now. "Sapient rights" is what it should be. Though I do believe humans aren't any better or worse than any other animal.

Originally posted by Uplifted
I'm with you. But not "sentient rights", there are lots of sentient creatures on the planet right now. "Sapient rights" is what it should be. Though I do believe humans aren't any better or worse than any other animal.

Well I still stick to the 'sentient rights'. Dolphins, certain primates, and I believe elephants are all sentient/self-aware, and so I strongly feel they should get all the rights that are applicable to their well-being. Our laws should support their rights with the same force and respect of our own. imho.

Let's say hypothetically we create a bipedal animal that is self aware and intelligent, but has no human DNA. This being would not qualify for your 'sapient rights' then. What if this being was moral, capable, and willing to contribute to society... does it not deserve rights to protect its well-being?

**edit to ask: are you actually a falconer? That has always caught my interest

[edit on 1-7-2007 by Cloak and Dagger]

Hmm a hybrid like Dark Angel? If she looks like Jessica Alba I don't see me complaining about eating crackers in bed. But seriously. I think we will start seeing things of this nature in the near future if nothing else than a vainity fad. Cat eyes, forked tongues, angelic wings (from a swan I guess), horns, whiskers, scales, feathers and tails of all kinds. It will become like cosmetic surgery only on a genetic manipulation scale.

The comic in me begs to ask if making out will be called petting or yiffing at that point. (bad, I know)