PDA

View Full Version : Cloning-cult leader vows to fight



Earth Walker
August 6th, 2001, 11:42 PM
A science-and-sex cult leader is vowing to fight a proposed U.S.
banon human cloning all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court.
The leader of the 55,000-strong Montreal-based Raelin Movement
said yesterday in Vancouver he's confident a move by the U.S. House of Representatives to ban cloning human embryos "will
be declared unconstitutional."
"I've been expecting this. The United States is the best place
to fight this because of their constitution and their commitment
to personal freedom," said Claude Vorilhon, who founded the
Raelians and goes by the name Rael.
The U.S. House of Representatives voted Tuesday to ban human
cloning, including cloning human embryos for medical research.
Rael, a former French car-racing writer, claims to have been
contacted in 1973 by almond-eyed, one-metre-tall aliens.
He says they revealed to him that they created humans 25,000
years ago as part of a cloning experiment.
Now Rael preaches that people will eventually achieve immortality
through cloning.
"Cloning a baby is just the first step." said Rael, who vaguely
resembles the Michelin Tire Man in his puffy white space-suit-like
outfit. "Eventually, we will be able to download our memories
and even what we call our soul into new, cloned bodies."
Rael, an advocate of free love among his followers, was
surrounded yesterday by devotees, incliding a number of nubile
young women. He says 100 female followers are ready to be
surrogate mothers. Dismissed as a space-age wacko even by
pro-cloning groups, he spoke in March to a U.S. congressional
hearing into cloning. He was invited in part because of reports
the Raelians were about to clone a human embryo in a U.S. lab.
Last month, the U.S. Food and Drug Agency raided the Raelians'
U.S. laboratory and warned the group to stop research into
human cloning.
But Rael, who shrugs off warnings that human cloning is
dangerous by saying all scientific advances involve risks, insists
there is a second secret lab.
He dismisses arguments that cloning is unethical by sayng ethics
have no place in science. He says his organization is based on
science, not religion.
"A hundred years ago the church said vaccination was wrong,"
Rael said. "If they had their way hundreds of thousands of
people would have died. We are simply offering people life,
eternal life."
--Greg Middleton--Province Staff Reporter


She who is NOT to be interrupted!
****************************
I think of "men" as the diminutive of Women.

Lilu
August 7th, 2001, 08:41 AM
LOL Sounds like he's been paying too much attention to the movie "The 6th Day".

Lilu

Kaylara
August 7th, 2001, 12:15 PM
There are some scary scary people out there.

Kaylara

slvr_phoenix
August 7th, 2001, 12:23 PM
But at the same time, being allowed to clone humans, at least for some reasons, would be nice. I mean if your heart goes bad, wouldn't it be nice to be able to have a new one that your body won't ever reject? (Because it's taken from a clone of yourself.)

There are plenty of reasons why cloning would really be helpful medically.

Kaylara
August 7th, 2001, 12:24 PM
But wouldn't that be murder?

Kaylara

slvr_phoenix
August 7th, 2001, 01:41 PM
That depends entirely upon point of view.

Personally, I'm not alltogether comfortable with the idea myself. However, it would help save many lives. And after the disposal of the remains, just think how many organ donations and blood donations there would be.

It's grim, twisted, and sick, but it'd also save more lives than it destroyed, if you even viewed the clone as a life, which could be difficult if the only "life" the clone has known is a vat.

**really big shrug**

Myst
August 7th, 2001, 01:48 PM
So clone body parts, not humans.

If you can get the technology to clone humans it shouldn't take long to get the technology to clone organs, and there's no killing involved.

*thinking 6th day created way too much hype around this topic, and that she knows a few people who would benefit from cloned organs*

slvr_phoenix
August 7th, 2001, 01:54 PM
I agree, cloning a specific organ or body part would be considerably better than cloning a whole body and then destroying the body. However things are never so simple as they seem.

If you clone just a single part, you have to keep that part alive long enough to mature into usefullness.

If you clone just a single part, you have to actually make sure that part gets used so that it doesn't go into shock once it's implanted. (Imagine how weak an unused heart would be.)

And, to clone just a single body part, we have to not just be capable of duplicating an entire genetic structure, but we have to know just what parts to modify where so that the part knows just what organ it's supposed to be.

We're on the right path, but we're still a lot farther from cloning individual parts than we are from cloning an entire person.

Mooncrow
August 7th, 2001, 02:40 PM
Cloning happens today as we speak. I take insulin twice a day, it's human insulin created in a lab, by "growing" it, it's cloning out and out.

As for the subject of growing organs, it is my understanding that if your heart goes bad and you replace it with a "grown" heart of your own tissue, the heart too, will go bad, only faster than the first time, as your DNA knows the pattern and replicates it. However on the other hand (so to speak) if your DNA holds the pattern of your body, amputees would be able to "grow" replacement limbs. But better yet, why not figure out the code in DNA and fix disease by genetic recoding?

Opened a can of worms, but I had to do it;)


BB

Mooncrow

Myst
August 7th, 2001, 02:46 PM
Originally posted by Mooncrow
As for the subject of growing organs, it is my understanding that if your heart goes bad and you replace it with a "grown" heart of your own tissue, the heart too, will go bad, only faster than the first time, as your DNA knows the pattern and replicates it.

Who said you had to use your own tissue? You can use someone else's cloned heart that matches your blood type etc.

And, you're assuming that DNA is the only deciding factor in a heart going bad, which it's not. As we know pollution, smoking, lots of fatty foods, lots of alcohol, etc. can cause a heart to go bad... even if your DNA makes you predisposed to that you can probably avoid them and have a better chance...