h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

I take it from you message that you are ok with creating clones of human beings purely for the harvesting of organs if no suffering is involved.

There are a few problems with that type of attitude.
first of all, what about free will? A clone is identical to a human being so it will have a will as well. No clones have actually been made yet (well not officially proved anyway)so we can only guess at what they will be like, but my guess is they'll be just like any other ordinary human being, indistinguishable from any other human being, like you for example (you are human aren't you?). THis is because they will be made up of exactly the same DNA as the donor. It is the DNA that makes us the way we are. A consequence is that if you think clones could be used for harvesting organs, normal people could be used as well. Would you like to be 'drafted' to give some of your organs away?

Then there is the suffering problem. To harvest organs we have to perform surgery. Any kind of surgery involves pain and thus 'suffering'.

Of course to eliminate all these problems you could keep the clones 'in stasis' all their lives, but who will pay for all that? The prise of organreplacement will shoot up as high as the sky in order to be able to afford this. What about the moral issue? one of those clones could be someone - had he/she been given the chance of a life - who for example finds a cure for HIV, or finds a way to travel faster than light and thus revolutionises physics. Chances are the clone will not, but the possibilities exist!

And to the question of the soul. Identical Twins are clones of each other, does that mean one of them has a soul and the other not? (interesting hypothesis)

you mean, as in good twin, evil twin?

I said IF there were no suffering - I did not say it is currently possible to do this without causing suffering, simply that if that were possible I would support it.

Equally a clone could have been the next hitler if we hadn't stopped it - I find potential arguments irrelevant (keep running into this argument in abortion debates)

Also bear in mind I think clones are equals to humans in all respects - I cannot make this argument unless I accept that it would be okay to treat humans this way.

So I ask the question how would I feel had I been born to be kept in stasis all my life until somebody else needed an organ? If the answer is that I would never have had a concious thought in my life I can't see why I would care.

So far as cost arguments go I think that you have to go to any legnths necassary to avoid unecassary suffering - the extra cost incurred should be considered as part of the basic cost of this line of treatment - if we (as a society) cannot afford to use this technology then it needs to be refined - not just sold to the highest bidder

As for my humanity - well I claim to study AI mebbe I'm a turing machine

I recommend that any person looking for guidance on this topic read the book "Sex, drugs and sausage rolls." written by Robert Rankin