Zitat des Tages über Klonen / Cloning:
The cloning of humans is on most of the lists of things to worry about from Science, along with behaviour control, genetic engineering, transplanted heads, computer poetry and the unrestrained growth of plastic flowers.
The bill would ban human cloning, and any attempts at human cloning, for both reproductive purposes and medical research. Also forbidden is the importing of cloned embryos or products made from them.
Cloning looks like a degrading of parenthood and a perversion of the right relation between parents and children.
I don't believe that efforts to prohibit only so-called reproductive cloning can be successful.
I think we can allow the therapeutic uses of nuclear transplant technology, which we call cloning, without running the danger of actually having live human beings born.
Cloning is great. If God made the original, then making copies should be fine.
The people who make policy decisions should damned well know what they are talking about before they make the decisions. There is nobody who is an expert on cloning who would be afraid after seeing Attack of the Clones.
I'm trying to grow more limbs in order to multitask at a greater rate and I'm also investigating the possibilities of cloning. Because nothing would be more useful than having multiples of me, and that way, I could do all of the things I'd like to do in the short amount of time we all have here.
I've been opposed to human cloning from the very beginning.
Human cloning is coming.
Many other countries have already banned human cloning, and there are efforts at the UN to make such a ban universal.
We've had cloning in the South for years. It's called cousins.
There are two kinds of cloning right now. One is therapeutic cloning which is for coming up with cures for life threatening, really, really awful diseases. Then there is reproductive cloning, which is to make a human being out of your DNA and a donor egg.
I am in favor of stem-cell research. I am not in favor of creating new human embryos through cloning.
I am opposed to both cloning and the destruction of human embryos and adamantly opposed to funding of embryonic stem cell research.
We are not interested in cloning the Michael Jordans and the Michael Jacksons of this world. The rich and the famous don't participate in this.
Cloning will enable mankind to reach eternal life.
Royalty is either going to do very well with cloning, or it's going to disappear completely.
The federal and state governments should ban the use of taxpayer funds to support cloning and embryonic stem cell research.
Cloning represents a very clear, powerful, and immediate example in which we are in danger of turning procreation into manufacture.
It's very hard to make arguments about the effects of cloning on family relations if family relations are in tatters.
We live in a science fictional world with things like cloning and face transplants, and things seem to be getting stranger and stranger.
In cloning, in contrast, reproduction is asexual - the cloned child is the product not of two but of one.
During this period, I became interested in how the new techniques of cloning and sequencing DNA could influence the study of genetics and I was an early and active proponent of the Human Genome Sequencing Project.
I think there's this tradition of a culture of NDAs that has spanned all the way back to the '70s and '80s when game developers where very paranoid about cloning and people copying one another's ideas and business sabotage.
If out of concern over cloning, the U.S. Congress succeeds in criminalizing embryonic stem-cell research that might bring treatments for Alzheimer's disease or diabetes - and Dr. Fukuyama lent his name to a petition that supported such laws - there would be real victims: present and future sufferers of those diseases.
No one would want to read a book in which I explain the science of cloning because it would be very dull and it would also make no sense.
Cloning, wow. Who would have thought? There should be a list of people who can and cannot clone themselves.
What we think is ethical today, we may not have thought ethical five or 10 years ago. Cloning, stem cell research? However we feel about those things today, we may feel differently 10 years from now.
If society becomes comfortable with cloning and sees value in true human diversity, then the whole Neanderthal creature itself could be cloned by a surrogate mother chimp - or by an extremely adventurous female human.
I would not want to see any relaxation of the law prohibiting human cloning.
Cloning interferon was not something I wanted to get into.
In early January I introduced my legislation, which, besides prohibiting Federal funding of human cloning, also expresses the sense of Congress that foreign nations should establish total prohibition on human cloning as well.
The argument has been made in Congress that it is slippery slope if you allow therapeutic, what people people are calling therapeutic cloning, then you will get reproductive cloning.
If you took some famous religious leader, for example, and said it would be nice to clone them indefinitely so you have a dynasty of leaders, my own guess would be that each time the cloning takes place, they would become more and more defective, presumably mentally defective and subsequently worse.
Suppose that every prospective parent in the world stopped having children naturally, and instead produced clones of themselves. What would the world be like in another 20 or 30 years? The answer is: much like today. Cloning would only copy the genetic aspects of people who are already here.