It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by LordGoofus
But if you modified this "creature" enough so that it was basically nothing but a lump of flesh designed to support human organs for transplants, it wouldn't be classed as a sentient being. It wouldn't have a brain. Would not survive without being plugged into machines, and wouldn't be able to reproduce by itself, let alone move. It would just be a really really weird container for holding human organs.
Originally posted by Odd
Something about this concept really disgusts me. Call me old-fashioned if you like, but the idea of deliberately robbing a potentially sentient human being of its life for 'harvesting' of any kind really disgusts me.
Originally posted by OddSomething about this concept really disgusts me.
Originally posted by Amethyst
What about cloning just a body part like a heart or a liver if someone needs a transplant?
Originally posted by DYepes
Ok hello it wouldnt have a brain! It is equivalent to a vegetable or any kind of plant. We grow all kinds of plants for food and harvest them, what the difference in growing meat and harvesting them for saving lives? If you are saying that a sack full of meat with no brain on life support could have been sentient and it is moraly unacceptable to do so, then you would agree that all that corn or potatoes could have been sentient and is morally unacceptable to do the same to that stuff.