Do you think it would be immoral if humans started creating clones for the purpose of using them as lab rats?

If in the future, people cloned humans and used the clones to experiment on in the name of scientific and medical progression? Would clones be classified as humans or not?Do you think it would be immoral if humans started creating clones for the purpose of using them as lab rats?
Yes, cloned humans are still human, just like identical twins. Experimentation on them would be as immoral as experimentation on anyone else.Do you think it would be immoral if humans started creating clones for the purpose of using them as lab rats?
Yes, it would be immoral.





Why would you need to ';classify'; a human clone as human? Why would you even need to legislate who is human and who is not? THAT is what would be immoral.





Leaving morality aside for the moment, what would even be the purpose for cloning an entire human being? I can see only two reasons that you would EVER need to clone an entire human being:





First, if there was a plague that threaten to wipe out the entire human race, you could save uninfected cells to automatically regenerate the human race in the far future after the plague had run its course and died out.





Second, it would be the only practical way to send the human race to other planets circling other stars since the journey would be thousands or tens of thousands of years long.





But, getting away from science fiction, what would be the problem with being able to clone individual organs from your own body to use in transplants? Organs like a new kidney, or a new liver, or a new heart? Organs that could be transplanted WITHOUT the worry of rejection? Would that be an immoral use of cloning?


.
If they managed to stop the development of a functioning brain I would not have an issue with it. If the body is just a hunk of meat and organs without any though or pain then I would not consider it human.





This is a grey area though and I think it would be very difficult to ever rea ch that point without hurting someone.





I have no issue with animal testing for medical purposes. If we achieved human clones then that may not be necessary and we may get better results but I have no clue what people against animal research expect us to do. Do you wan to be the first living thing a drug is tried on or shall we use a rat first?
I agree with David M. It would be much more efficient to clone and sustain single body parts (livers, kidneys, etc.) to do testing on or to use as replacements for people needing transplants rather than creating a complete, functioning human being. Not only would something like this be immoral, but it would be extremely inefficient. I'm not even sure why anyone would do this, unless they were a sadist.
good question....ya know, nazis experimented on humans for the sake of medical advancements.................immoral is immoral, if you wouldn't do it to yourself or your own son, then why do it to a clone?





morality isn't determined by what we are doing something to..........it isn't as simple as, ';if done to a human it is immoral, but to a monkey it's okay';
according to some clones dont have spirits and therefore they dont have life!





and if cloning (farming) for body parts becomes legal, i think it would be because science can do it and people will want it, to pay for it, and that they have ';enough'; money to do it.





i wonder how Jesus created a NEW EYE for the blind, out of dirt and spit. was it only symbolic act? or was there a cloned member already prepared and just simply replaced dirt and spit. or was the dirt and spit changed to conform to the dna and genetis of the blind man.


its obvious that God Cloned Eves' body, to me, from adams rib


but i think the spirit still had to be added afterwards


All of us have a preexistence. so if a person can learn to clone and learn to add a spirit, is it by the will of God or permission or is in complete disobedience to God. ???
It is immoral if the clone is required to have a human female to bring it into existence. If we can somehow create clones without having to use a woman to actually ';have'; the clone, then I think it is acceptable.
yea.... but with the new generations who knows.. maybe they will view this as progressive science.... people are so de-sensitized now watching music videos, video games movies etc..... you never know... whatever saves the hides of those in power will most likely be okay....we are an arrogant species.
Clones would be human, just like people conceived naturally. It's very immoral to use a human being as a lab rat, especially if there is a chance that the person could be severely injured as a result.
wouldn't really need to - could just clone the relevant organs or body parts rather than functional human clones. No higher brain function = no experience or sensation = no immorality.
Humanity has already been guilty of treating other humans as lab rats.





Tuskegee Syphilis. google it.
This is essentially a slippery slope question come strawman.





Yes, it would be immoral.





Yet this is the concept that fundies think scientists have in mind when the fundies try to ban stem cell research.





POINT MADE: read ';witnessofjesus'; remark below about ';farming'; to see how screwed up these morons have it.
Yes haven't you ever seen that film ';The Island'; very immoral.
Cloning humans to begin with shouldn't be done.
Yes. Que sera, sera.
Yes, it would be immoral. A cloned human is the same as a twin.
Yes. But I also think what we do to rats is immoral.
Yes, I also think it is immoral to use rats as lab rats.
Yes it would be immoral.
No, so long as there is not a functional brain. All it would be is tissue..
well....i think messing with creation is messed up...
yes...however it is probably being done...look to North Korea, they have some prisions that are so hidden if you go in, you are never heard of again.