Re: "Cloning Breakthrough" not one

From: Mike Lorrey (mlorrey@datamann.com)
Date: Mon Nov 26 2001 - 10:38:19 MST

Next message: Lee Daniel Crocker: "Re: WAR: appropriate first use (was: If we do get Afghanistan...)"
Previous message: Jacques Du Pasquier: "Re: Praxeology Data"
In reply to: John Clark: ""Cloning Breakthrough" not one"
Next in thread: Anders Sandberg: "Re: "Cloning Breakthrough" not one"
Reply: Anders Sandberg: "Re: "Cloning Breakthrough" not one"
Reply: Robert J. Bradbury: "Re: "Cloning Breakthrough" not one"
Reply: John Clark: "Re: "Cloning Breakthrough" not one"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

All these alleged 'ethics experts' claim that there is some moral reason
against reproductive cloning, but I've never actually seen anyone detail
the philosophical principles for such a claim. Can anyone point to some
arguments against reproductive cloning that are not just "because it's
so" statements?

Next message: Lee Daniel Crocker: "Re: WAR: appropriate first use (was: If we do get Afghanistan...)"
Previous message: Jacques Du Pasquier: "Re: Praxeology Data"
In reply to: John Clark: ""Cloning Breakthrough" not one"
Next in thread: Anders Sandberg: "Re: "Cloning Breakthrough" not one"
Reply: Anders Sandberg: "Re: "Cloning Breakthrough" not one"
Reply: Robert J. Bradbury: "Re: "Cloning Breakthrough" not one"
Reply: John Clark: "Re: "Cloning Breakthrough" not one"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat May 11 2002 - 17:44:22 MDT