Reproductive cloning

I see plenty of uses for reproductive cloning, but all them seem to benefit one particular group of individuals. Let me begin my argument by saying what is it that ticks me off when I even think about reproductive cloning. The idea that human life can be manufactured in a fashion that is similar to the manufacturing of automobiles (refer to opening chapters of “Brave New World”). The whole image makes me shudder. The idea here is that if manufacturing of clones becomes a technology, then societies will have divisions of brightest engineers, mechanics, marines, etc. This does pose a very important question: to what extent will the cloning technology be limited, and if it is not properly controlled won’t the society lose the ability to reproduce in a traditional way? I am assuming here that the society with too many clones will lack the variety of genes to allow people to reproduce in a traditional way, because it will be akin to the abnormalities of a child whose parents are brother and sister. On one hand our society may become an assorted pool of the brightest and the best, but on the other hand the society will probably lose the natural desire to have sex. Aside from the fact that cloning is best suited to replenish troop concentrations in war zones and all the moral and ethical issues associated with this, I do not agree with the following statement: “Reproductive cloning may be used to bring back from the dead the one you love.” I feel that no matter how hard a loss of a loved one may be, that cloning a loved one will not “fix the problem.” The problem is that the person, who clones their loved one, will never ever forget what happened, and will be more depressed with the clone then they would if they accepted the death. I am sure of this based solely on my intuition. Therefore I would not be against this type of reproductive cloning if people chose to do it, but I am certain at this point in time, that I would rather accept a death of somebody very close to me than to try and clone that person. The religious aspect of this argument is somewhat difficult. I firmly believe in existence of some higher form of being, that kindly overlooks our existence, but I know that I cannot prove its existence, and that I cannot even prove existence of my soul using purely scientific methods. If clones do have a soul, like say stones and trees, and animals and everything in our universe, than the problem is that we as humans do not have the right to fill manufactured bodies with a substance that we have not even started to understand (and it seems that we have no intention to prove or disprove the existence of a soul).

GM foods

We want to eliminate world hunger…because we are paying our farmers to produce less food. Oops wait that doesn’t make sense. We meant to cut the bull crap and tell the truth: in order to sustain an economic growth and stability (according to our own agenda) we will produce exactly a controlled amount of foods for the right echelons of people. We will reserve unmodified foods for those who can afford it, but we will feed everybody else with the food that is most profitable to produce. We will focus our research in the field of genetic food modification with one specific and primary goal: produce crop that requires no care (that includes but not limited to: food is not edible for insects, small animals, birds, etc.), grows in any type of soil, under any conditions. If this goal is reached all side effects are not important; if there are any side effects they will be noted and archived. If we can get away with this, i.e. we are not brought to the Supreme Court we will continue with the program. We will also make sure that other less fortunate (third world) countries have our foods. We will buy out their food distributing and producing infrastructure, thus imposing the import of our foods. We will make sure that their markets for unmodified foods can only provide more expensive foods than our alternatives, thus pushing out whatever competition we may face. Food that creates problems only fuels the stability of the economy (doctors of various fields have jobs). Those who see our plan as flawed, and try to undermine it by advocating a different course, will be neutralized.

Therapeutic cloning

This is the only cloning that I would consider as a real benefit to society if it can be done in an ethical manner. If scientists come up with a way to reproduce specific organs without using embryonic stem cells than I would have nothing against those people who would want an organ transplant. On the other hand I am against the replacement of an organ that has ceased to function for my own body because I believe that it would be against the laws of nature.