From: ABlainey@aol.com
Date: Sun Jan 05 2003 - 00:46:36 MST
To start, the subject of Dolly's arthritis. I have had a quick thought about
this one. I have suffered from arthritis of the neck and shoulder since the
age of 20. This wasn't due to some genetic problem, just an unfortunate
accident.
It sometimes makes me loose sleep, it is a constant annoyance and
there has been days where suicide has seemed an option. On reflection I
can't see how I would be better off dead because of this affliction, whether
genetic in cause or not. Likewise I cannot see how Dolly would be better off
dead in her case.
I would agree with Lee's Healthy > Unhealthy > Null explanation and
would site Steven Hawkin as an example. Is he better off dead now? Is
Christopher Reeve? No
These two men's cases are obviously not the same as a clone born with
a genetically determined affliction, but they do make you think about where
we draw the line through when life is and isn't worth living. In addition
they both show why we need to develop cloning technology.
If you have never been to a special education school for the
profoundly disabled. I would recommend it before passing judgement on what
quality of life is worth living. A room full of smiles and happy children can
show you that despite being in profound pain and suffering or having
disabilities that make grown men cry just thinking about them. It is very
hard to draw the line on what is expectable. Even If a clone was born
profoundly disabled, I couldn't say it was better off dead. In fact I would
say the opposite. Some of the happiest people I know are disabled and after
all. Isn't happiness the point of life?
I can only see cloning as a good thing. It is inevitable that there
will be clones born with abnormalities. Doing it the good ole fashion way
isn't exactly the safest thing in the world. These cases of abnormality due
to the cloning process will rapidly decrease as our knowledge grows and I
honestly cant see any clone coming to term with such an ailment that would
render their life not worth living.
Most of the arguments I have heard against cloning are about the
irrational fears of what we will do with these clones. Great unstoppable
armies, better make them immune from every pathogen on the planet! Slave
labour, please! Hideously deformed mutants,!
Why don't we just replace the word Clone with Twin in every doom sayer
paper on the subject and reread them? I know a few Twins and funnily enough
they have never tried to take over the world, have never been used for
scientific experimentation, have the same civil rights as the rest of us and
as far as hideously deformed mutants. well they may not be the pretiest
people, but I think that is a bit harsh.
Didn't we have most of these arguements and fears when IVF first produced a
baby? Can anyone remember?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jan 15 2003 - 17:35:50 MST