Re: Cloning - Good or bad?
The Other Matthew, on host 151.201.61.131
Tuesday, August 7, 2001, at 15:51:15
Re: Cloning - Good or bad? posted by Wes on Tuesday, August 7, 2001, at 15:27:40:
> I agree with you there. Although I do think Einstein would come up with new scientific ideas, and that Babe Ruth would end up playing baseball. > > Wes
I believe Babe Ruth played baseball because he had no father or mother, and was sent to an orphanage/school where baseball was the only thing to do. And with how much work one is forced to do today to excel at athletics, Ruth would quit, because he was one of the laziest ball players ever (not that that's saying much.) And because only "Parents who can't have kids" would be allowed to clone, Ruth would have two parents, and would not end up in an orphanage. Sure, his parents could force him to play baseball, but what's to say we won't become addicted to say, the Internet, first?
I don't know much about Einstein, but I'm sure that the public school system of today would be enough to ruin him. Once they saw him failing math or whatever it was he failed, they'd stick him in some remedial "Learning Disabled" class, give him some Ritalin, and that would be that.
And I just thought of something else. Try to imagine the shock you would feel if you were told at the age of seven, that you weren't your parents child, but that you were cloned from Babe Ruth, that you had already "existed." I'm sure even if your parents tried to hide it from you (which sure seems ethical/moral, but whose to say we're being ethical/moral here?), there would be some law saying that at age 18, they send you letter about it, or that you'll see it in all those records and stuff you get to look at when you're 18. Or maybe some guy gets curious some day and says, "Gee, I wonder if I'm a clone." They do a little research and lo and behold! They are! I don't know about you, but that would disappoint the hell out of me. More so than not being told I was adopted. I'd rather be adopted than cloned.
And what if you met some other kid at school who says "Hi! I'm a clone of Babe Ruth" and you say "Oh really? So am I." So now there is ANOTHER one of you in existence. You've already existed, and now there's another one of you around. That would be like the time-travel scenario where if you traveled time and saw yourself, you'd explode or something like that. I don't think too many people could handle that kind of psychological strain. We'd have clones dropping like flies. I don't think it would be the same as discovering a long lost twin. I mean, that other Babe Ruth is YOU!
And the expectations of being a clone! What if you were the next Jesse Owens or Carl Lewis, and everybody and their brother expected you to own the Olympics every year, and all you do is train your ass off, because after all, you are an exact copy of a world-class athlete. And you tear I don't know, your Achilles tendon or something, causing nearly irreperable harm to your body because all you do is run around a track all day. And you live the rest of your life knowing that you really ARE a failure, because your parents cloned you to be a track star, and now you're flipping burgers at McDonalds.
I just think that aside from being ethically and morally wrong, cloning would be impractical. It would produce the same, maybe worse results, as adoption, for a much higher price, and that the potential for enormous psychological damage to clones is just too much.
The Other "Mmm....McDonalds...." Matthew
|