Human Cloning

[Don John of Austria]

[quote]A human being without a soul = dead. So, I'd say it would be really, really obvious if the clone lacked a soul![/quote]


As I said above, there is morethan one type of soul, a clone would not have to have a Rational (human) soul, but could have a sensitive ( animal Soul) and be a monster.THis is not a contention simply a statement that his is a possiblity, there is no reason to conclude that the Rational Soould comes a priori with the human form, in fact, Scripture indicates to us that it does not.

[quote]As for the transgenic work, I don't see anything wrong with introducing human genetic information into bacteria or yeast to produce particular proteins for the pharmaceutical industry. We most certainly are doing it already, and I have not heard any ethical condemnation of the practice.

There is a limit to the types of proteins a bacteria cell is capable of manufacturing, so the more involved ones actually need to be assembled in mammalian cells, which are harder to grow in culture. But again...we do this commercially already and have been for the past 10 years. [/quote]

That there is a a long standing practice of doing something does not mean that it is morally acceptable. If for no other reason, Transgenic experimentation is extremly dangerous, in adition, there are questions aboutthe violation of the dignaty of human life when discussion the Use of Human DNA in sucha situation.



[quote]Genetic engineering to repair a human who is injured/diseased would be okay as well. After all, medicine is meant to address/fix problems, and gene therapy would simply be a new aspect of that. I mean, assuming we're not killing someone else to do it or something bizarre like that. But that would be putting [i]human[/i] DNA in humans. The idea of putting foreign DNA into a human being is much more problematic because of the potential side effects and problems. But it wouldn't be condemned simply for being nonhuman. After all, you can use a pig heart valve and transplant that into a human. [/quote] I am not sure that this is necessarly true either, restoration of a persons genetic code to a previous natural state after damage by a virus or radiation would certianly be morally acceptable, but say "repair" of a perosn with a congenital genetic disorder would probably not be. Placing a nonhuman organ or part into a human is not the same thing as placing pig DNA in a genetic code, one is a external thing, used to treat a medical problem. THe other is a modification of the the very stuff that determines form.

If the human soul does come A priori with the human form, there is no reason to believe it would come with a creature whose form had been modified with inhuman DNA.


[quote]Playing around with mixing up humans and other species to introduce new traits is on much dicier ground, morally. I mean, I haven't heard of any transgenic research that seemed to be a problem (starting with ANDi the monkey), and I don't see people going into the whole 'Island of Dr. Moreau' or 'Brave New World' scenarios with this. But...yeah. Certainly unethical directions you could go with that. [/quote] I can very much see humans going with such senerios. A number of years ago a survey of americans indicated that 35% of them would support Genetic engineering of human beings simply to make them better looking, and something like 60% would support it to make them more inteligent. I can see it being easliy accepted if you wer ableto say, increase strength, or speed, or reflexes... as long as they were not obvious changes to the look of th resulting creature.

[Sylvanna Imbris]

[quote name='Don John of Austria' timestamp='1306853067' post='2248148']
As I said above, there is more than one type of soul, a clone would not have to have a Rational (human) soul, but could have a sensitive ( animal Soul) and be a monster.This is not a contention simply a statement that his is a possibility, there is no reason to conclude that the Rational Soul comes a priori with the human form, in fact, Scripture indicates to us that it does not.
[/quote]

Yes, I had forgotten about the animal-type soul option... I am curious though, where in Scripture does it seem to indicate that the human form does not necessarily come with a human soul?

[quote name='Don John of Austria' timestamp='1306853067' post='2248148']
I am not sure that this is necessarily true either, restoration of a persons genetic code to a previous natural state after damage by a virus or radiation would certainly be morally acceptable, but say "repair" of a person with a congenital genetic disorder would probably not be. Placing a nonhuman organ or part into a human is not the same thing as placing pig DNA in a genetic code, one is a external thing, used to treat a medical problem. The other is a modification of the the very stuff that determines form.
[/quote]

Well, from what I understand, these transgenic experiments in living people would not be a true modification of their genetic code. They would receive these DNA pieces as plasmids (I think) and these would never be [i]incorporated[/i] into their DNA, just [i]recognized[/i] by the body as if they were. The children of people who had this sort of treatment could never receive these other DNA pieces, they're just not part of the true genetic code. So it would be just like using a heart valve from a pig...it is accepted by the body but not passed on genetically.
If you were to modify the DNA by actually attaching a foreign piece and then using that to make your clone that would be a modification of what determines form, but you can only do this sort of thing before the person exists, I don't think you can force a new piece of DNA into the already existing code of a living being.

[quote name='Don John of Austria' timestamp='1306853067' post='2248148']
If the human soul does come A priori with the human form, there is no reason to believe it would come with a creature whose form had been modified with inhuman DNA.
[/quote]

What about when the form is still human but unusual, such as in the case of cloning? If the human soul does come a priori with human form how far from "normal" human form can you go and still necessarily have a human soul?

I find your ideas very interesting! I'd always assumed that human form necessarily implied human soul...if it doesn't then what does tell you that you have a human soul?

[Don John of Austria]

[quote name='Sylvanna Imbris' timestamp='1306868699' post='2248248']
Yes, I had forgotten about the animal-type soul option... I am curious though, where in Scripture does it seem to indicate that the human form does not necessarily come with a human soul?



Well, from what I understand, these transgenic experiments in living people would not be a true modification of their genetic code. They would receive these DNA pieces as plasmids (I think) and these would never be [i]incorporated[/i] into their DNA, just [i]recognized[/i] by the body as if they were. The children of people who had this sort of treatment could never receive these other DNA pieces, they're just not part of the true genetic code. So it would be just like using a heart valve from a pig...it is accepted by the body but not passed on genetically.
If you were to modify the DNA by actually attaching a foreign piece and then using that to make your clone that would be a modification of what determines form, but you can only do this sort of thing before the person exists, I don't think you can force a new piece of DNA into the already existing code of a living being.



What about when the form is still human but unusual, such as in the case of cloning? If the human soul does come a priori with human form how far from "normal" human form can you go and still necessarily have a human soul?

I find your ideas very interesting! I'd always assumed that human form necessarily implied human soul...if it doesn't then what does tell you that you have a human soul?
[/quote]



Well there are multiple occasions in which angelic creatures take human form, this form was not illusionary but physical and real. Further, Genesis tells us that the fallen angels bred with the Daughters of Men and produced the Nephilim. Now I am well aware of the current interpretation of the passage regaring the Nephilim, regardless the passage tells us that inhuman things can indeed have the form of a man, and bear children with us, that seems to imply pretty strongly that thier actual form was that of Man and not simplythe appearance of Man.


Viruses can actually change the DNA of the cells they are in, a virus which was enginnered to alter the DNA throughout the body would be passed tot he Children, ranted this seems like it would be very ifficult to accomplish in women, do to the nature ofthe development and storage of the ovum but it would be much easier for a man, where sperm are created daily.


the answer to how far away? I don't have an answer..... my personal opinion is that it would not be very far, many animals are not very far from us, geneticly speaking.

[BigJon16]

[quote name='AudreyGrace' timestamp='1306638388' post='2247214']
In my genetics class, we just finished studying DNA cloning, Dolly the goat, etc. The question arose regarding the morality of cloning humans. If, in the future, humans are ever cloned, would that person have a soul as we see it? I guess the bigger question is, when humans start playing God in that extreme, how does the soul manifest in the body? I can't really think of a better way to ask the question I'm trying to, so I hope you all understand what I'm trying to say. Regardless, what are your thoughts on the issue? Would they have souls and be religious beings even if they were not created by God? Or, although cloned, are they still in a sense brought to life by God?
[/quote]

This is how I look at it (but It may have a few flaws, and Im open to criticism) :

A new life cannot be made without God's permission. So It would seem to make sense to me that if someone is cloned then they would still have a soul, because God still had to grant them life. No matter how scientifically advanced we are, we cannot grant life, only God can. So in-affect all life --weather "initiated" by humans or not-- comes from God. It is impossible for something to not be created by God.

[xSilverPhinx]

So basically if it lives and is normal then it has a soul.

[stevil]

[quote name='BigJon16' timestamp='1306949791' post='2248761']
A new life cannot be made without God's permission. So It would seem to make sense to me that if someone is cloned then they would still have a soul, because God still had to grant them life. No matter how scientifically advanced we are, we cannot grant life, only God can. So in-affect all life --weather "initiated" by humans or not-- comes from God. It is impossible for something to not be created by God.
[/quote]

So then there is no harm in trying to make clones or genetically engineered life forms, if it lives then it is god's will, if it doesn't then no harm done.

[Don John of Austria]

[quote name='BigJon16' timestamp='1306949791' post='2248761']
This is how I look at it (but It may have a few flaws, and Im open to criticism) :

A new life cannot be made without God's permission. So It would seem to make sense to me that if someone is cloned then they would still have a soul, because God still had to grant them life. No matter how scientifically advanced we are, we cannot grant life, only God can. So in-affect all life --weather "initiated" by humans or not-- comes from God. It is impossible for something to not be created by God.
[/quote]
So your position is that God individually wills every life form into existance, every seed, every rat, every bactirium splitting and creates for them at that moment an appropriate soul?

[Don John of Austria]

[quote name='stevil' timestamp='1306955517' post='2248812']
So then there is no harm in trying to make clones or genetically engineered life forms, if it lives then it is god's will, if it doesn't then no harm done.
[/quote]


That would be a legitiment interpretation of Big Jons position. I do not think that is necessarly the case.

[BigJon16]

[quote name='Don John of Austria' timestamp='1306965730' post='2248924']
So your position is that God individually wills every life form into existance, every seed, every rat, every bactirium splitting and creates for them at that moment an appropriate soul?
[/quote]


I was thinking primarily Human life, but...I guess you could get that specific if you want to. How could life not come from God? Does Satan have the power to create life? I think not.

[BigJon16]

[quote name='stevil' timestamp='1306955517' post='2248812']
So then there is no harm in trying to make clones or genetically engineered life forms...[/quote]


Not what i said. I simply stated that it makes sense to me that all life has to come from God.

Weather God wills cloning or not, well, I cant answer that, only God can. Why don't you ask Him? Oh wait... hahahah No offense meant Stevil, I'm just breaking chops. Lol.

[CephaDrigan]

[quote name='stevil' timestamp='1306955517' post='2248812']
So then there is no harm in trying to make clones or genetically engineered life forms, if it lives then it is god's will, if it doesn't then no harm done.
[/quote]


No; while God may not condone certain actions, because He IS good, he can still bring good out of these. For example, consider that a girl engages in fornication and conceives a child. While her action is not morally acceptable nor is it likely to be pleasing to God, he may still bring some good out of the situation through the child itself. At the same time, while God may not approve of the method in which humans are brought into life, he may again deem these creatures to have good within them, thus granting them a soul.

[stevil]

[quote name='BigJon16' timestamp='1306974385' post='2248979']
Not what i said. I simply stated that it makes sense to me that all life has to come from God.

Weather God wills cloning or not, well, I cant answer that, only God can. Why don't you ask Him? Oh wait... hahahah No offense meant Stevil, I'm just breaking chops. Lol.
[/quote]
LOL

We are not on a talking basis. If I did start talking to god, I would feel like I am talking to myself.
Not that I am god mind you.

[xSilverPhinx]

[quote name='Laudate_Dominum' timestamp='1306842580' post='2248094']
Just speculating I'd guess that many therapeutic applications are morally acceptable. I mean, if it effectively amounts to repairing a defect, or curing a disease, then why not? But I imagine specific treatments and applications would have to be examined in all their particularity. There are some obvious slippery slopes. I don't think there are clear-cut lines between things like "repairing defects", and engaging in Khan-style genetic engineering. I don't really know though. What are the fundamental ethical principles to begin with? I know the work being done on aging is far more complicated than this, but imagine if you could reprogram the aging process to stop at a given point. Would this be unethical? Might it rather be one of the greatest achievements of humanity? If the latter then why not all out Khan-style genetic engineering? (By Khan-style I mean to refer to the Star Trek mythos in which a race of super humans was engineered, etc.)
[/quote]

Not on the topic of genetic engineering but...

[url="http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2011/05/16/apparent-immunity-gene-cures-bay-area-man-of-aids/"]HIV positive man cured after a bone marrow stem cells transplant[/url]

[CephaDrigan]

[quote name='xSilverPhinx' timestamp='1307415267' post='2250693']
Not on the topic of genetic engineering but...

[url="http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2011/05/16/apparent-immunity-gene-cures-bay-area-man-of-aids/"]HIV positive man cured after a bone marrow stem cells transplant[/url]
[/quote]

I would like to point out that that was[i] [/i][i]not [/i]embryonic stem cell research that caused that.

At any rate, would the clones having souls pertain at all to Elijah and Elisha, where Elisha had a double portion of Elijah's soul?