is it murder if one kills himself to save himself? an example, a person is dying
because of a failing organ. but he has a perfectly made and healthy clone,
devoid of all illness and disease. the person takes the healthy organ out of the
clone and implants it to save himself. but in the process, the clone dies. yet
the clone is a part of the person. it's a living being. it has the possibility
of having a soul/personality. would it be considered murder? suicide? i believe
that it's neither. the clone is a property of the original. the original has
every right to do whatever they want with the clone. are they playing god? to
decide the fate of others? who knows. to people who believe a deity doesn't
exist, it's meaningless. anyway, just a little curiosity popping here and there.
hope this piques your interests.
Boy you are going to let loose a lot of controversy with this one I suspect.
It's certainly an interesting situation you have posed here, and it's really
hard for me to put an answer together that really satisfies all my beliefs in
one. Personally I don't think we should hold ourselves back in the pursuit of
science. People may say we are playing God, but we are playing humans. If we
have the capability to do something, then how is it playing God? If we try to do
something and just can't, then that would be an unattainable Godlike power. IE
if we can create a human from mud then it's the power of a human, but can we
create mud from nothing? This all of course hinges on whether or not each
individual believes in God.
But back to the point at hand. If we assume that the situation you proposed is
the only option, then I'd likely do it. If my very own clone has the capability
to save the original, then what's the harm in it? The main arguement will be as
you said, it has it's own soul and personality. However this again hinges on
your belief of the soul. From a purely scientific stance, taking the organ to
lengthen the life of the original is the most logical choice. It is nothing but
a clone of the original created by science, therefor can be destroyed by it.
Still though, one hell of a question to really wrap your head around.
yes, it is. no matter what, u musnt kill urself because of the pain. do u really
know what's ur goal in ur life? we arent here juzt for waiting of the death. we
have sins, n job to do, that's why we live-to erase our sins. if u kill urself
is juzt the same, or maybe worst-_ u would be go to hell bcoz u havent doing
anything for God.
Quote by priincessyes, it is. no matter
what, u musnt kill urself because of the pain. do u really know what's ur goal
in ur life? we arent here juzt for waiting of the death. we have sins, n job to
do, that's why we live-to erase our sins. if u kill urself is juzt the same, or
maybe worst-_ u would be go to hell bcoz u havent doing anything for
God.
I get the feeling you completely missed the actual question being asked. There
is no greater sin than replying to a thread improperly.
. .. ... If anybody is ever going to convert a studied atheist or agnostic, they
won't be some teenager who can neither speak, nor spell correctly -- that sort
of thing merely reinforces our points -- nor would it be a person who claims
that the Christian holy text (or any religious holy text) is without
flaw.
Anyway, going back to the topic at hand, I would say that killing your clone to
save yourself is murder.
Just because it is your clone, does not make it your property. As was said, the
clone is its own person, be it male or female, and would be fully conscious and
aware. There would be little difference than killing your identical
twin.
Furthermore, I would like to point out, if science has advanced enough to create
a perfect clone of a person without having to go through the traditional growth
that humans have to go through (infant->child->teen->etc) then science
has probably advanced enough so that they are able to grow a perfect replacement
for the injured organ/limb/what-have-you to begin with, so that a complete clone
is simply not needed.
Already science and doctors can regrow certain organs and body parts, but the
cost is so high and the parts in question don't always graft well with the
receiving patient. Costs and success, however, are improving day by day, so I
would be loath to say that one would ever have need of generating a full and
conscious clone to begin with, just to replace, say, a heart.
And if you want to mention having a brain replacement... The brain is what gives
us our consciousness. If you replace your brain with somebody else's, and yours
is destroyed, you, as the conscious entity, are dead, while the person whose
brain has been transplanted into your body has become the new "you"
(though they would obviously be themselves, just with your body instead of
theirs).
So yes, I feel that killing a perfect clone of yourself to save yourself would
be murder.
Quote: Just because it is your
clone, does not make it your property. As was said, the clone is its own person,
be it male or female, and would be fully conscious and aware. There would be
little difference than killing your identical twin.
yeah. but what if the clone was willing? even more, what if the clone had no
conscious? supposedly souls do exist. what if the clone had no soul and was just
a shell? what then? i think a lifeless doll would count as property
That "what if" you speak of, is always going to be a wildcard. Let's
assume for a moment that this is indeed nothing but a lifeless doll, I still
think there is going to be widespread disagreement. Those who believe in souls
will always say its killing a human being. Much like how there is such a
disagreement as to when a human is truly a human when in the mothers womb. When
does a baby not yet born to be considered a human being? It's because of that,
that there is so many different opinions on abortions. You'll run into the same
issues with cloning I think.
probably. i just like "what ifs". it's too bad we can't can perfectly
clone a person. i mean to the same age and build of a person. i want to know if
the clone actually has the same personality as the original or if he has
different views of his own.
If the clone doesn't have a soul and is just an empty shell, then I don't see
why not. But I think it's cruel to bring clones into the world. Besides, taking
a gamble on whether or not the clone has a soul is a pretty risky gamble. You
won't know the answer until after you die. >.>
Anyway, I don't think you should kill him/her/your clone.
Quote by jaecelledyIf the clone
doesn't have a soul and is just an empty shell, then I don't see why not. But I
think it's cruel to bring clones into the world. Besides, taking a gamble on
whether or not the clone has a soul is a pretty risky gamble. You won't know the
answer until after you die. >.>
Anyway, I don't think you should kill him/her/your
clone.
Yes, but science throughout history has been based on such "risky
gambles". Hell, some of history's greatest stories are built on risky
gambles, IE the Declaration of Independence, Columbus sailing around a world
thought to be flat, Galileo's claim that the Earth goes around the sun not the
other way around. Humanity would be set back centuries were we not able to take
such risks.
It's science's job to take these "risky gambles". Since there is
essentially no proof of the existance of the human soul we cannot base
scientific progress on it. Proof and theory is the basis of science, and
religious belief and science will almost always be at odds with one another.
They each tend to contradict one another, much like the divine creationism vs
evolution.
wouldn't it be interesting if god was actually the one who initiated evolution
and if he was the one who caused the big bang? stuff like that'll be more
plausible than when they're separate. at least that way, i'll believe there is a
god.
I dont see it as murder because if it is truly a clone, it is all just a piece
of w you are, meaning that God didnt create a new soul fr that clone, it's a
fragment of your own soul. The clone is all your DNA and it is man-made, so it
would be perfectly humane to use it for whatever purpose YOU created it for.
Yes, it would be a murder. Your clone isn't you; so, it wouldn't be a suicide.
You would go to jail for homicide because you would kill another person that
happens to have the same DNA as you. There's no need to clone an entire person;
just clone the needed organ or limb.
Quote by IronSerpentJust because it
is your clone, does not make it your property. As was said, the clone is its own
person, be it male or female, and would be fully conscious and aware. There
would be little difference than killing your identical
twin.
Excellent point. I have an identical twin, so this caught my attention. As most
of you already know, identical twins are biological clones of one another. So a
man-made clone could be thought of as one's identical twin. And if you have an
identical wtin, you'd know that you'd never kill him/her if one of your organs
was failing.
So I'd have to say that it'd be murder to kill your clone for an organ.
Especially since we'd probably be able to reconstruct organs before we'd have
the technology to properly clone someone.
i got a question? since you're identical twins, do you have the same personality
or mindset? what if both of your twin's kidneys are failing? wouldn't you want
to donate one kidney so that he/she can live (it's possible to live with one
kidney after all)?
If you're both identical, shouldn't both of your kidneys fail at the same time?
(Obviously no because they can't be in the same situation together, but still,
kind of an odd though)
I'm probably not going to look through the fora that often, just log on and see
if any group guestbook, and look through some wallpapers.
Quote by oudoroboui got a question?
since you're identical twins, do you have the same personality or mindset? what
if both of your twin's kidneys are failing? wouldn't you want to donate one
kidney so that he/she can live (it's possible to live with one kidney after
all)?
We have different personalities. And if he was in need of a kidney, of course I
would give him one of mine. But cloning yourself for a kidney wouldn't kill your
clone, so that'd make this topic irrelevant. However, if I was in need of
say.... a new liver, I wouldn't want my twin to sacrifice his life to give me
his - even if he was voluntarily doing so.
is it murder if one kills himself to save himself? an example, a person is dying because of a failing organ. but he has a perfectly made and healthy clone, devoid of all illness and disease. the person takes the healthy organ out of the clone and implants it to save himself. but in the process, the clone dies. yet the clone is a part of the person. it's a living being. it has the possibility of having a soul/personality. would it be considered murder? suicide? i believe that it's neither. the clone is a property of the original. the original has every right to do whatever they want with the clone. are they playing god? to decide the fate of others? who knows. to people who believe a deity doesn't exist, it's meaningless. anyway, just a little curiosity popping here and there. hope this piques your interests.
Boy you are going to let loose a lot of controversy with this one I suspect. It's certainly an interesting situation you have posed here, and it's really hard for me to put an answer together that really satisfies all my beliefs in one. Personally I don't think we should hold ourselves back in the pursuit of science. People may say we are playing God, but we are playing humans. If we have the capability to do something, then how is it playing God? If we try to do something and just can't, then that would be an unattainable Godlike power. IE if we can create a human from mud then it's the power of a human, but can we create mud from nothing? This all of course hinges on whether or not each individual believes in God.
But back to the point at hand. If we assume that the situation you proposed is the only option, then I'd likely do it. If my very own clone has the capability to save the original, then what's the harm in it? The main arguement will be as you said, it has it's own soul and personality. However this again hinges on your belief of the soul. From a purely scientific stance, taking the organ to lengthen the life of the original is the most logical choice. It is nothing but a clone of the original created by science, therefor can be destroyed by it.
Still though, one hell of a question to really wrap your head around.
yes, it is. no matter what, u musnt kill urself because of the pain. do u really know what's ur goal in ur life? we arent here juzt for waiting of the death. we have sins, n job to do, that's why we live-to erase our sins. if u kill urself is juzt the same, or maybe worst-_ u would be go to hell bcoz u havent doing anything for God.
I get the feeling you completely missed the actual question being asked. There is no greater sin than replying to a thread improperly.
well, i was answering the title.. n the 1st sentence, lol
Read the whole thing. Especially saying that killing himself = clone; to save himself = his original. It is technically correct, but a play on words.
hahaha. you guys are the ones who i like to read from the most. always make me laugh.
lol.. we've been arguing alot, darkroseofhell^^ n u still doesnt believe God yet -_
Yea cause if anything is going to convert someone, it's going to be a forum site.
. .. ... If anybody is ever going to convert a studied atheist or agnostic, they won't be some teenager who can neither speak, nor spell correctly -- that sort of thing merely reinforces our points -- nor would it be a person who claims that the Christian holy text (or any religious holy text) is without flaw.
Anyway, going back to the topic at hand, I would say that killing your clone to save yourself is murder.
Just because it is your clone, does not make it your property. As was said, the clone is its own person, be it male or female, and would be fully conscious and aware. There would be little difference than killing your identical twin.
Furthermore, I would like to point out, if science has advanced enough to create a perfect clone of a person without having to go through the traditional growth that humans have to go through (infant->child->teen->etc) then science has probably advanced enough so that they are able to grow a perfect replacement for the injured organ/limb/what-have-you to begin with, so that a complete clone is simply not needed.
Already science and doctors can regrow certain organs and body parts, but the cost is so high and the parts in question don't always graft well with the receiving patient. Costs and success, however, are improving day by day, so I would be loath to say that one would ever have need of generating a full and conscious clone to begin with, just to replace, say, a heart.
And if you want to mention having a brain replacement... The brain is what gives us our consciousness. If you replace your brain with somebody else's, and yours is destroyed, you, as the conscious entity, are dead, while the person whose brain has been transplanted into your body has become the new "you" (though they would obviously be themselves, just with your body instead of theirs).
So yes, I feel that killing a perfect clone of yourself to save yourself would be murder.
right =)
yeah. but what if the clone was willing? even more, what if the clone had no conscious? supposedly souls do exist. what if the clone had no soul and was just a shell? what then? i think a lifeless doll would count as property
That "what if" you speak of, is always going to be a wildcard. Let's assume for a moment that this is indeed nothing but a lifeless doll, I still think there is going to be widespread disagreement. Those who believe in souls will always say its killing a human being. Much like how there is such a disagreement as to when a human is truly a human when in the mothers womb. When does a baby not yet born to be considered a human being? It's because of that, that there is so many different opinions on abortions. You'll run into the same issues with cloning I think.
probably. i just like "what ifs". it's too bad we can't can perfectly clone a person. i mean to the same age and build of a person. i want to know if the clone actually has the same personality as the original or if he has different views of his own.
clone isnt right ! be made for be killed.
btw, have u read mix-clone cow n human? scary things >_
If the clone doesn't have a soul and is just an empty shell, then I don't see why not. But I think it's cruel to bring clones into the world. Besides, taking a gamble on whether or not the clone has a soul is a pretty risky gamble. You won't know the answer until after you die. >.>
Anyway, I don't think you should kill him/her/your clone.
Yes, but science throughout history has been based on such "risky gambles". Hell, some of history's greatest stories are built on risky gambles, IE the Declaration of Independence, Columbus sailing around a world thought to be flat, Galileo's claim that the Earth goes around the sun not the other way around. Humanity would be set back centuries were we not able to take such risks.
It's science's job to take these "risky gambles". Since there is essentially no proof of the existance of the human soul we cannot base scientific progress on it. Proof and theory is the basis of science, and religious belief and science will almost always be at odds with one another. They each tend to contradict one another, much like the divine creationism vs evolution.
Just something to think about.
wouldn't it be interesting if god was actually the one who initiated evolution and if he was the one who caused the big bang? stuff like that'll be more plausible than when they're separate. at least that way, i'll believe there is a god.
I dont see it as murder because if it is truly a clone, it is all just a piece of w you are, meaning that God didnt create a new soul fr that clone, it's a fragment of your own soul. The clone is all your DNA and it is man-made, so it would be perfectly humane to use it for whatever purpose YOU created it for.
Yes, it would be a murder. Your clone isn't you; so, it wouldn't be a suicide. You would go to jail for homicide because you would kill another person that happens to have the same DNA as you. There's no need to clone an entire person; just clone the needed organ or limb.
Excellent point. I have an identical twin, so this caught my attention. As most of you already know, identical twins are biological clones of one another. So a man-made clone could be thought of as one's identical twin. And if you have an identical wtin, you'd know that you'd never kill him/her if one of your organs was failing.
So I'd have to say that it'd be murder to kill your clone for an organ. Especially since we'd probably be able to reconstruct organs before we'd have the technology to properly clone someone.
i got a question? since you're identical twins, do you have the same personality or mindset? what if both of your twin's kidneys are failing? wouldn't you want to donate one kidney so that he/she can live (it's possible to live with one kidney after all)?
If you're both identical, shouldn't both of your kidneys fail at the same time? (Obviously no because they can't be in the same situation together, but still, kind of an odd though)
I'm probably not going to look through the fora that often, just log on and see if any group guestbook, and look through some wallpapers.
We have different personalities. And if he was in need of a kidney, of course I would give him one of mine. But cloning yourself for a kidney wouldn't kill your clone, so that'd make this topic irrelevant. However, if I was in need of say.... a new liver, I wouldn't want my twin to sacrifice his life to give me his - even if he was voluntarily doing so.