What are clones? Can we use clones as we wish?

A multi-cellular organism that is genetically identical to another living organism that is produced either naturally or using bio technology.  A clone can be produced by taking an egg from an ovum and removing the inner genetic material and replacing it with the nucleus material of another person.  This produces a replica of the genetic material that was transplanted into the egg.

Sadly, the cloning experiments used to produce Dolly the sheep resulted in many attempted clones being killed to accomplish producing the one viable clone.  Many see this as evidence that the cloning of humans would result in hundreds, if not thousands of tiny cloned human beings, being killed because they were not genetically fit.  We find this to be a very risky and morally abhorrent form of research.

http://www.geneticsandsociety.org/resources/items/20010330l

http://members.ispwest.com/elainec_347/CloningStemCellResearch.html  

What is the difference between Therapeutic and Reproductive Cloning?

The only real difference between "reproductive cloning" and "therapeutic cloning" is that a "reproductive" clone is allowed to live and a "therapeutic" clone is one that is grown simply to get something  from them,  i.e. stem cells, tissues or eventually organs which of course kills them."  Many lawmakers will try to promote Embryonic Stem Cell Research, ESCR, by stating that no cloning will occur and that they will only get stem cells from “somatic cell nuclear transfer.” This is a false statement as "somatic cell nuclear transfer" is a fancy term for "therapeutic cloning", which is clearly cloning and killing children for their parts.”

Does cloning occur naturally?

Yes, we know them as identical twins in which an embryonic human at the earliest stage of development will for some reason divide into two separate individuals.

* (I like to think that God was so impressed with the first one that He made a second one.)

http://embryology.med.unsw.edu.au/Defect/twin.htm

Scientists can mechanically divide a tiny human embryo to make a clone or twin of the original. But what if we could medically tell if a newly made embryo was indeed going to divide to make a twin?  Can you imagine some parents being overjoyed at the prospect of having twins in the womb?  But what if they found out that the government has determined that it is required to kill one of the embryos?  After all, one of the twins is “extra” and is a bonus for medical research!  I am pleased that we have not gone down that road yet, but I say this to make the point that the only reason we would find this abhorrent to kill one of the twins for their stem cells or for making other clones is that the parents “wanted” this second child. It is sad to say we are repeating the very wicked history of the Nazi’s who determined that because some people were not “wanted” or “extra”, they are somehow less human than others. We have done this with those “extra” embryos that are in the IVF clinics, deciding that they can be killed for their parts because they are “unwanted”.

Some have said the embryo is not human at this early twinning stage of development because the other twin was not completely separated as yet from the original.  But one must consider that the embryo at this stage is made of many cells that are in the process of producing a duplicate of its own genetic identity. This process is not an affirmation of a non differentiated human organism, as the inherent quality of twins is already in place. If it were not so, twins would not develop out of the original. Thus its potential ‘to become’ is actually an affirmation of its inherent value and identity. If we are to believe that humans are not human unless they have separate bodies, does this mean that conjoined twins are not human? The debate about whether to use embryos for research should be a debate as to whether any human has an inherent worth regardless of their stage of development.

Even if one can say that an embryo is only a potential infant, would that mean that a toddler is any less human because they are a potential adult?  And if some are inclined to say that an embryo is not human within the 2 week time period that the other twin is being revealed, then, are they saying that we should legally protect the embryo after the possibility of the embryo twinning are complete?  If this were the case, then the vast majority of surgical abortions would be prevented.

Sadly, the goal of many doctors and scientists is that they are trying to bring cloned people into the world to serve us, either by taking the clones developed parts or in the case of an embryo to take their stem cells which effectively kills them.  

Scientific Goals of Cloning

Scientists hope that the embryonic stem cell research, ESCR, will be able to develop into many needed tissues for humans who have diseased conditions.  This desire on the face of it seems commendable, yet the solution for curing these debilitating diseases is the cost of other human lives. To make matters worse ESCR scientists are ignoring the many cures to be found in cord blood stem cells from discarded umbilical cords and placentas as well as the stem cells found in every adult.  These are very ethical forms of stem cell research and cures.  And the desire by the ESCR scientists to clone embryos does not stop at the first few days of development. Remarkably we can see the reducing of even older unborn children to mere parts at times in this news article below.

http://www.cloninginformation.org/info/cloningfact/fact-02-06-03.htm

“They then implanted the cloned embryo into a surrogate cow and let the embryo grow for about six weeks before removing it.”  What an amazing and very frightening statement!  They actually grew this child inside of a cow to get kidney and heart tissues, thus they were harvesting parts from a six week unborn child!  And yet, some will say that this child was not human because they were not grown in a human womb, as though the location of a human changes their DNA or their worth.

http://www.baptiststandard.com/postnuke/index.p

Their statements are without any merit, for if this child was not human, how can they harvest human parts from them?  This kind of research only proves our point that cloning and ESCR and fetal tissue research is made up of much of the same mind set that led to the atrocities of the Nazi doctors.  Those cruel doctors in the name of science conducted brutal experiments on children as well as adults. I am certain the overriding ethic of the doctors was the overall benefit that the general public would receive from their research. Does that sound familiar?

Yet the Bible teaches us that “real love does no wrong to a neighbor.” Romans 13:10.  Was it not Jesus who said that “whenever you did it to the least of these, you did it unto me.”? Matthew 25:45  Is it not interesting that the definition of the Greek word, for “least”, elachistos, is “least in size, amount and dignity, the smallest” Is that not a good definition of the embryo?

We should also consider the concept that is in orthodox Christian theology that Christ Himself is God incarnate.  In other words, miraculously, Christ who is God in human flesh, came to earth to pay the penalty of our sin by dying on a cross.  When the angel told Mary, the mother of Christ that the Holy Spirit would overshadow her she conceived in her womb by the agency of the Holy Spirit, the God-Man Jesus Christ. Even as an embryo, Christ has to be considered fully human in order to be the God-Man. Consider that Elizabeth her cousin said that Mary was the mother of Our Lord, probably days after Mary had conceived the Lord in her womb (Luke 1:43).   So, at the moment of conception, Jesus Christ was 100% God and Man.  There is nothing in the sacred text of Scripture to indicate otherwise.  Additionally, consider that John the Baptist was filled with the Holy Spirit even from his mother’s womb (Luke 1:15).  But if John were not human in the womb, why would God give His Spirit to a blob of tissue?  God only gives His Holy Spirit to people, not soulless things.

So we can see that even the doctrine of the divinity of Christ shows that embryos must be human in order for there to be the God-Man, Christ or as with John the Baptist, to be filled with the Holy Spirit while in his mother’s womb.

The pursuit of headless clones

 A doctor in the United Kingdom as well as in India suggested altering the DNA of an embryo and cloning them so that they would grow without a brain. What is their goal? To make sure the unborn child’s parts could be harvested from these clones without any fear of actually violating their rights.

http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2004/nov/04110207.html

http://www.consciouschoice.com/2000/cc1310/ichabodies1310.html

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=46967

Rightly did Paul the Apostle say that those who dishonor God will inevitably slide into greater evil, calling them “inventors of evil” (Romans 1:30).  This certainly applies to the embryonic stem cell industry that dishonors God and does harm to their neighbor by enslaving them for their parts by creating a science that is unethical and cruel. Even the animals are treated better than this, as many know that to traffic in eagle parts in America, that one could be fined $150,000.00 or even put in jail for 5 years.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2005/02/21/eagles-040221.html?ref=rss

And yet, Jesus Himself said that we were of much greater value than the sparrow (Matthew 10:31).

We should be against the efforts of cloning unborn children without brain function, as these little ones had to be genetically altered to produce them without brain function. In a sense they were disabled purposefully to benefit those who are already grown.  If they already had a brain and the scientist removes that brain, no matter how early their development, the scientist is guilty of taking a person’s life away.  Is this not a form of murder?  If you were in your mothers womb and some doctor did the same to you, would you not consider that action to be an attack on your life? If a scientist was able to clone many children without brains we should still be against such actions because they have degraded humanity to mere parts which is a grave disrespect towards our Creator and to humankind in general.  I believe the Golden Rule applies in such cases. Would you want someone to take your parts away, like your brain?  Would we want to be treated that way?  I am sure that Jesus Christ would want us to treat the human embryo as we would want to be treated when we were embryos; with care and respect. We cannot escape the fact that all of us were embryos at one time and had assumed the care and protection of our mothers.

Scientists think they are being kind and ethical by telling the public that they will not allow their cloned subjects to live. This is commonly known as therapeutic cloning. This is should also be considered unethical, because once a human is conceived they should be afforded the same protections and dignity that we all expect.

And what if they allow clones to live?

If the cloning of humans becomes successful, we as fellow humans must act on behalf of a cloned child as well, as they are just as human as we are.  If they were allowed to live, they could probably live the very life that we enjoy everyday.  It is ignorant to assume that a cloned person does not have a soul like any one of us; any more than saying that only one person of a set of identical twins has a soul.  Without a soul or spirit they would not be alive as humans.  Our desire to protect them is wrapped in the concept that all humans are made in the image of God. We have a moral obligation to protect our neighbors regardless of their size, location or their level of dependency.

A Conversation with a Scientist

Is there an inherent difference between a bunch of cells and an embryo that is described as a clump of cells?  I spoke to a scientist at Kansas State University and asked that very question of her.  She responded by saying that there were no real differences between the cells on my hand and the cells in the womb that were just forming.  To which I responded, “If we were to have a special vaccine that killed a tiny portion of skin cells on everyone’s hand for a hundred years there would be no noticeable difference, as we lose cells off of our hands every day.  But if I developed a vaccine that killed that little clump of cells we know as an embryo in every woman, we would go extinct.  Apparently, there is a difference between the cells on my hand and the little clump of cells in the womb.”  She did not have much to say regarding my statement because I believe she did not have an answer for the glaring truth.  Embryos are much more special and inherently different than simple skin cells. It is the difference between the life and death of the human race.