From a theological perspective, how far is too far when it comes to growing organs in labs and exploring human and animal cloning?

[person0]

5 minutes ago, Anddenex said:

One value of cloning, if possible, a couple looses their child during birth. Cloning this child could bring comfort to the parents, but notice the child was first conceived through proper and moral methods as designated by God.

The problem with this example is our lack of knowledge about exactly when the spirit enters the body.  In this specific situation, my perception is that the clone would actually be a different child.  If the child dies after being alive (dying during the birth process would indicate the child was living for part of the process), then the child's spirit would be in the spirit world, and a clone of the child would have a different spirit, and hence be a different person altogether.

Physical characteristics being the same would not necessarily make it the same person.  If someone cloned you, the new person would have your physical character traits, but would not be you.

20 minutes ago, Anddenex said:

we could see the following occur from this movie "The Island." The natural man would ultimately lead to the following with this process.

As I pointed out to Rob, I really don't see how this is the case.  Just because we make a clone, all of a sudden we are going to say that a fully grown human is not a human?  As I imagine it, that would require a significant societal regression.

[Anddenex]

1 hour ago, person0 said:

The problem with this example is our lack of knowledge about exactly when the spirit enters the body.  In this specific situation, my perception is that the clone would actually be a different child.  If the child dies after being alive (dying during the birth process would indicate the child was living for part of the process), then the child's spirit would be in the spirit world, and a clone of the child would have a different spirit, and hence be a different person altogether.

Physical characteristics being the same would not necessarily make it the same person.  If someone cloned you, the new person would have your physical character traits, but would not be you.

I don't see any problem with the example in light of the same information you have given. As nothing has been specifically revealed we do not know if the spirit of this child will be in the spirit world. If this were possible though, this may entice the leadership of the Church to provide a more direct answer regarding this scenario. My perception, God is the individual that would determine when one of our spirit brothers or sisters spirit would be in the spirit world. We know agency plays a significant role regarding our existence. God may very well provide the spirit a choice, you can come again in a different tabernacle, or you can move forward and live in spirit world until resurrection.

I understand though, the problem presented is your individual perspective regarding what has been revealed and what has not been revealed. I don't see it as a problem though, as in different forums we have discussed this concept in more detail. If the spirit were to be in the spirit world then this would indeed be a different spirit with the same characteristics as you have mentioned.

1 hour ago, person0 said:

As I pointed out to Rob, I really don't see how this is the case.  Just because we make a clone, all of a sudden we are going to say that a fully grown human is not a human?  As I imagine it, that would require a significant societal regression.

I would say you are placing to much faith in the natural man of the Terrestrial world we live in. We have scientists already saying the "fetus" is not human, thus we have millions of brothers and sisters being aborted each year.

We have a medical journal that is proposing that even humans which have been born, if we determine that they aren't aware of their existence, we can euthanize them -- age doesn't matter. The concept was proposing that babies which are newly born still can be aborted if determined they aren't aware of their existence. If they aren't aware of their existence they are not yet "living." The fact that this was even published in a medical journal speaks volumes to the natural man and what the natural man is willing to entertain.

We both agree, it would require a significant societal regression, but that doesn't change the fact that a "clone" would become property as the clone is bought through their own money and the clone is essentially them. Without religion, the spirit doesn't matter. It doesn't matter if that is a different spirit. That clone is you. You paid for it. You bought it. The clone is you and you have every right to do with yourself as you see fit.

I would say, the "natural man" would do anything if it meant living longer and enjoying life longer.

[person0]

12 minutes ago, Anddenex said:

a "clone" would become property as the clone is bought through their own money

For the most part you make agreeable points.  I assumed that you would bring up abortion, and I am aware of the medical journal you mentioned.  In regards to both that as well as the idea of a clone being considered property, I agree that many wicked people would see it that way; however, perhaps I have more faith in mankind, but I don't think that society at large ever would.

[CV75]

Fun facts to explore in the debate:

Human cloning is banned in some 70+ countries. That will not keep those with the interest and means from developing it.

Cloning occurs in nature (twins, asexual reproduction, etc.).

Clones are mostly, but not thoroughly genetically identical. There are many genetically-related and sub-genetic processes that prevent clone organisms from being thoroughly identical and even alter the expression of identical genes (the same gene can show up in different manifestations).

The cloning of our organs is a form of owning a human clone, and is on a par with banking our own blood for a future operation, transfusion, medical emergency, or performance doping.

Fun opinion: the spirit and the body are so thoroughly integrated that even “identical” bodies are two distinct souls, and a soulless body can show signs of life.

[person0]

I just read an interesting article on the subject.

[Traveler]

 

Many find fear in things they do not know or understand – sometimes to the point that if someone else understands or does something they cannot – then it is evil.  As we consider cloning – perhaps some may try to explain how the resurrection does not in any way involve the process of cloning.   We currently think in the space time in which we live – but eternal life may have more to do with cloning than we currently understand.  Of course, the human soul requires a spirit – but Joseph Smith told us that spirit is in all matter.  There is something about the spirit that results in human life – even the severely handicapper human life.   When we think of a handicap – we are thinking of some physical disability.  We are also told we will be resurrected with a “perfect” and proper frame.  To me this looks a lot like a clone and genetic manipulation. 

Many are of the notion that if man can figure out how to do what G-d does – we will not need him.  Or the more we become like G-d the more we will not worship G-d.  I am of a very different notion – I believe that emulation is the highest and most sacred kind of worship.  I am convinced that the more we are like G-d – not only will it be better for us – but it will be better for G-d and everybody else.

 

The Traveler

Edited April 26, 2018 by Traveler

[jewels8]

I don't know all the things about cloning.  I do think that life is sacred .  There may be a place for it, as a scientific miracle.  But I know that hundreds of embryos die in an attempt to find one that works.  And sometimes the one that starts to work, doesn't work perfectly.  As in the case of trying to bring back an extinct animal back to life, the animal was born, and lived 7 minutes, and died.  One of the professionals said about cloning humans, that that may be a very hard thing to do.  Dolly the sheep, lived 6 years.  The kind of breed she was could have lived 11 years.  Of course she had to be living in a facility, and not as  a regular sheep would.  As of 2016, she had 4 clones that have been alive for 9 years, I don't know if they are alive now.  Last year, I guess there were 2 monkeys cloned, using stem cells, the first primates, I guess.  Anyways, I think there is so much money used for this and so many embryos die in this research.  I don't know.  In some ways, it can be beneficial.  But it seems like a high cost.  Also, there is the need to keep life sacred.  There are so many different things to consider.