Would a clone be different?

Would a clone be different from a natural born human being?

Would they act differently? Some say that a clone would have no 'soul'. Would this make them less intelligent? Docile? Easily controlled?

they would have a soul just like you or i, and they would be a different person to the person which it has been cloned from. However it only becomes a freaky concept if you were to subject the person to exactly the same experiences as you, i mean exactly, thus he would litereally have the same brain links, now would this mean he had the same consciousness as you? who knows, besides how can you subject a person to the same stimuli as you, its impossible. In reality cloning has enormous potential in the future, could improve the length or our lives and the quality of it greatly.

There are clones alive and walking around in the world today, as there have been for milennia.

They're called "twins." The difference between a twin and a clone is that the clone might be born years after the original is.

So... let's restate the question: do you think that one member of a set of twins does NOT have a soul/is easier to control, etc? If so, which one, and how do you explain it?

Hi DeltaChaos

This is a subject that has been one of conjecture, but in reality, twins are clones, as Byrd said. All living entities that are born of another living entity have "souls" of some sort or another. This article was one we received when we asked the question. What it also says, is that until the "cord" is cut, or there is a separation from the "host"/mother, the entity is not a separate one. The "Right to Lifers" will have a problem with this, because while still a feotus, the entity is not an independant "soul", but is part of the "Host".

Cheers

Malai5

TOPIC

(CLONED SOUL)

5th September, 2003


Question:
When does a cloned soul become a new soul entity in the physical?

Answer:
The creation given to all souls is precipitated by the birth of the living. The junction between the created soul and the living.

Common to both � the one thread which is exists between the two has with it, its known direction. The living in the physical cements the process, which begins the souls new life run. The incubator is the stage at which all souls are given the chance to abort or continue.

A soul is a soul is a soul. The air that is breathed on its own without the corded connection gives to that new soul life � its life. No attachment to � only that which it was created from the seeded beginning or the collective beginning. To get back to the created connection is the thread that binds.

All life created with its own life path in tow was given to establish the link between the known and the unknown.

All beings have the ability to access this link.

All droids have the choice within them to seek knowledge away from 3D planted doctrines.

This is so.

Originally posted by DeltaChaos
Would a clone be different from a natural born human being?

I see no reason to think that a clone will be different in any way at all from any other human being. They'd be just like a twin. Would you say only one twin has a soul? I'd think not, so why think similarly about a clone?

Right, twins are clones.

So how does the religious anti-cloning coalition differentiate between a twin and a clone. Where's the evil in clones if they already exist?

Is the difference for them have to do with natural conception? Was there such ferver from the religionists in the day of the 'test tube baby'?

I think they would be an exact physical copy, but as environment does play into a persons developement, the clone may not act the same as the "original" person.

Originally posted by DeltaChaos
Would a clone be different from a natural born human being?

Would they act differently? Some say that a clone would have no 'soul'. Would this make them less intelligent? Docile? Easily controlled?

I think that a life is a life. A clone is alive, it made with the same building blocks that every life has. These are not robots they are humans. They have souls, what every that means to you.

I think, if you make a clone of a person, the clone would never be like the person. This why, the clone will not have the same things, people surounding him/her, as the person did. The times change, as times change, kids change, life changes.

I also think you can never tell the clone, he/she is a clone. This secret she be held at all cost. The child, person would never see them selves right.

My 2c

Hi All

Each "soul" has it's life path. It is different to every other "soul", whether they are brought up in the same envioronment or not. Each will have a different internal perceptional base from which to assess the inputs it will receive. Even twins do not see things exactly to same way, although they may have similar likes and dislikes, there are always subtle differences.

Cheers

Malai5

Originally posted by SpittinCobra
think that a life is a life. A clone is alive, it made with the same building blocks that every life has. These are not robots they are humans. They have souls, what every that means to you.

That's an easy one for me. I don't believe in souls, so there's no reason for me to believe that a clone would be any different from anyone else.

Would a human body MISSING an Eternal spirit from God be different from a human body without such an electronic template?

I suspect, only about as different as between an ape and a human.

One is sentient, and the other is merely a trainable animal.

That's my "take" on what cloning can do: reproduce bodies without any link to the Eternal Universe.

Of dubious value. All we NEED is MORE sub-humans, right?

Originally posted by Emily_Cragg
Would a human body MISSING an Eternal spirit from God be different from a human body without such an electronic template?

I suspect, only about as different as between an ape and a human.

One is sentient, and the other is merely a trainable animal.

That's my "take" on what cloning can do: reproduce bodies without any link to the Eternal Universe.

Of dubious value. All we NEED is MORE sub-humans, right?

A couple of things, First these seem like odd words from someone that has a fractal as there avatar.

Second This is why the secret has to be kept. Because the labels are starting. Sub-humans dont tell them untill they are 30, see where they are in life and decide if they are Sub-human.

Is the difference for them have to do with natural conception? Was there such ferver from the religionists in the day of the 'test tube baby'?

Yes, and Yes.

[edit on 25-10-2004 by Gazrok]

There's another reason to clone, and its not eugenics. My wife was killed in a car accident many years ago, and I had the coroner preserve a DNA sample. He had no idea what I was talking about back then. I had worked on the Human Genome Project at Stanford, so I did know what I had in mind. My wife's remains were cremated at her family's request, but I still have her DNA. If and when cloning becomes practical and legal, I will not hesitate to give her the gift of resurrection. My dog tags read: Preserve DNA Sample. Morbid? Maybe. Possible? Definitely. With rising infertility, in-vitro is becoming a neccesity anyway. Why not raise great-grandma if you've got no viable eggs?

Originally posted by Byrd
There are clones alive and walking around in the world today, as there have been for milennia.

They're called "twins." The difference between a twin and a clone is that the clone might be born years after the original is.

So... let's restate the question: do you think that one member of a set of twins does NOT have a soul/is easier to control, etc? If so, which one, and how do you explain it?

also have something to add

twins have different finger prints =)

you can clone body parts and all the physical parts but never able to clone a memory

you would be cloned without memories

I think many people have an incorrect understanding of what role the DNA plays in creating an organism.

Take for instance the cloned cat cc:
www.msnbc.msn.com...

Two cats share the same DNA but are different in many respects.

The DNA system is no more than an evolutionary set of guide instructions. Life is a learning system, and most of what makes up our different characteristics is based on environmental factors. Particularly environmental factors in the early stages of development.

It's almost like taking a sample of what the environment is like during early development and establishing that as the norm, everything else as foreign. A mathematical process for adaptation, perhaps.

Exposure to different forms of natural radiation causes random mutations. In which case I guess you could say it's probablistically low that two organisms with a large set of genes could ever be the same.

[edit on 25-10-2004 by electric]

I happen to be doing a debate on cloning in one of my classes.

There are three different types of cloning:

Therapeutic- using cells from a donor to recreate an organ
Embyro- another way to make twins, &
Reproductive- essentially a carbon copy of dna donor

You should check out this site, it covers alot of the ethics of cloning:
www.wits.ac.za...

Originally posted by Emily_Cragg
reproduce bodies without any link to the Eternal Universe.

Why in the world would cloning do this? Its just another way to make a person.

Of dubious value. All we NEED is MORE sub-humans, right?

What subhumans? There are no subhumans around now. Every human is fully human.

chakotay
I will not hesitate to give her the gift of resurrection

How do you figure its a resurection? The techonology is there right now anyway. But how do you figure it makes a difference?

this is semi off topic but how close are we to actually being able to clone a human successfully? I know we cloned that sheep, but I wouldn't say it was a success due to its genetic defects and short life span.

Do you think it will ever be possible?

And if so...would it ever be legalized? I hope not...for all sorts of reasons!

Originally posted by Lecky
Do you think it will ever be possible?

And if so...would it ever be legalized? I hope not...for all sorts of reasons!

It would absolutely be possible. If anyone thought it would be impossible, there wouldn't be so much debate and conjecture concerning the legislation of it. If it were legalized, for what reasons would you think it would be bad, or wrong, or what?