RE: Therapeutic cloning - technical fix to one objection?

From: Smigrodzki, Rafal (SmigrodzkiR@msx.upmc.edu)
Date: Sat May 25 2002 - 10:50:37 MDT


                Damien Broderick [mailto:d.broderick@english.unimelb.edu.au]
wrote:

                Suppose you could tweak
                some genes so that the foetus could not grow more than a
basic brainstem,
                just enough for vegetable survival. Such a being would also
`not be a
                potential person' but, rather, a kind of botched parody of a
human. Mr
                Spock might regard this as a useful project; I think anyone
here who finds
                the idea appealing should consider a career in a
concentration camp.

                ### I advanced this idea publicly a few years ago, just days
after the cloning of Dolly was announced. Why should it be repugnant?

                Say, I suppressed the growth of not only the brain, but also
extremities, lungs, everything except the target organ (e.g. the liver). We
would have a human clone, with only enough genes to make a placenta and a
liver, if anything an even more botched parody of a human being. Would the
use of such liver for transplantation be then more repugnant to you ?

                If no brain is harmed in an activity, there is no place for
moral outrage, IMO.

                I don't envision a career for myself in totalitarian penal
establishments.

                Rafal



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:14:21 MST