Human vs. ... Other

[Kelyn]

First of all, humans are no robots. We have a will and ability to make decisions independently. But clones, however human like remain at the beck and call of their creators.
I don't see any comparison. So why should they have the rights and privileges reserved for humans? It's a no brainer.

Clones are not robots either. They are living, breathing beings who, in this case (in the book), are capable of independent thought and emotion. Philosophically speaking, if society took on the question, why would these living breathing beings, created from the same material as we who are human (there's your comparison), remain at the beck and call of their masters. This almost amounts to slavery in my eyes. They are not animals and, therefore, should not have "masters" per se. I definitely don't see this as a no brainer. Still, thanks so much for stopping in and sharing your thoughts with us!

[LyorBoone]

First of all, humans are no robots. We have a will and ability to make decisions independently. But clones, however human like remain at the beck and call of their creators.
I don't see any comparison. So why should they have the rights and privileges reserved for humans? It's a no brainer.

Are clones robots in this case? Or are they lab grown beings from a Test Tube like the people in Brave New World?

[Jude Austin]

Are clones robots in this case? Or are they lab grown beings from a Test Tube like the people in Brave New World?

In this case, no, they're not robots There are no robots in the books' universe They're normal humans (well, okay, genetically modified humans) grown in cloning vats.

[Barbara6886]

I think this is a great ethical question. It is very similar to the issue of abortion. At what point is a human granted human rights? What is life and when does it begin? With cloning science advanced to the point it currently is without legislation In most countries preventing the cloning of a human this could be a real issue facing humanity.
“ I think; therefore I am” Descartes.

[Barbara6886]

I have also seen multiple comments stating that a clone is not human because it is grown in a lab. So, my question is are babies born through in vitro fertilization still human? Even though they were started in a lab and later implanted in a woman? At what point do you draw the line and say this one is human but that one is not?

[Kelyn]

I think this is a great ethical question. It is very similar to the issue of abortion. At what point is a human granted human rights? What is life and when does it begin? With cloning science advanced to the point it currently is without legislation In most countries preventing the cloning of a human this could be a real issue facing humanity.
“I think; therefore I am” Descartes.

I have also seen multiple comments stating that a clone is not human because it is grown in a lab. So, my question is, are babies born through in vitro fertilization still human? Even though they were started in a lab and later implanted in a woman? At what point do you draw the line and say this one is human but that one is not?

I personally believe that the issue will exist very soon. As you said, the science is advanced enough, and without the proper legislation, this is a nightmare waiting to happen. A nightmare for the clones and those who have been cloned that is. I love your questions; they’re very valid. Here’s another one for you. If a clone is made of you, since it theoretically will be physically identical to you, could/would it be considered your identical twin, albeit much younger than you? Food for thought. Thanks so much for stopping in and commenting!

[Nujudee]

They are certainly clones as they literally were lab creations.
That doesn't mean they don't deserve their rights too

[PRECIOUSreads]

I think this is a great ethical question. It is very similar to the issue of abortion. At what point is a human granted human rights? What is life and when does it begin? With cloning science advanced to the point it currently is without legislation In most countries preventing the cloning of a human this could be a real issue facing humanity.
“I think; therefore I am” Descartes.

I have also seen multiple comments stating that a clone is not human because it is grown in a lab. So, my question is, are babies born through in vitro fertilization still human? Even though they were started in a lab and later implanted in a woman? At what point do you draw the line and say this one is human but that one is not?

I personally believe that the issue will exist very soon. As you said, the science is advanced enough, and without the proper legislation, this is a nightmare waiting to happen. A nightmare for the clones and those who have been cloned that is. I love your questions; they’re very valid. Here’s another one for you. If a clone is made of you, since it theoretically will be physically identical to you, could/would it be considered your identical twin, albeit much younger than you? Food for thought. Thanks so much for stopping in and commenting!

If the clone is made from your DNA and is physically identical to you it would be considered your identical twin but... if it is younger than you, would it then be considered your offspring? This would relate to biology. For example, the amoeba creates identical copies of itself and this is their form of reproduction. So wouldn't our clones be our offspring in this case?

[Nath_chuks]

Yes they were not given birth to, which actually made them not to be human. But that doesn't mean they shouldn't be treated as one. I think they deserved some rights too. I would call them human based clones

[Nerea]

They are Projects with human like features. Since they are lab created beings, they serve in the pleasure of their masters, that is, the scientists. Technically, they are slaves to the scientists and may not enjoy the same rights as other humans. And true, they don't have parents, so it would be appropriate to call them human-based clones.

If two clones have a child, do you consider their child a human-based clone?

Not at all. When two clones mate, the offsprings are not clones, but normal children as other sexually-reproduced children.

[LyorBoone]

They are Projects with human like features. Since they are lab created beings, they serve in the pleasure of their masters, that is, the scientists. Technically, they are slaves to the scientists and may not enjoy the same rights as other humans. And true, they don't have parents, so it would be appropriate to call them human-based clones.

If two clones have a child, do you consider their child a human-based clone?

Not at all. When two clones mate, the offsprings are not clones, but normal children as other sexually-reproduced children.

Would such children get more human rights than their clone parents? Or would they have no more rights than the clones that serve at the pleasure of their scientist creator?

[Falling4Ever]

While, as clones, they may not have been born and raised as normal humans, they still very much are human through a genetic view. However societally, I think it’ll separate them and more in the future maybe, from those classically born.

[Kelyn]

While, as clones, they may not have been born and raised as normal humans, they still very much are human through a genetic view. However societally, I think it’ll separate them and more in the future maybe, from those classically born.

Unfortunately, I think you're right. Humans fear/dislike those things that are unknown to them or even dissimilar. I fear that the only way clones might secure full human rights is to start concealing that they are clones. But who knows, maybe (hopefully) the human inability to accept that which is different will change and adapt. I doubt it, but one can always hope.

[gracedivine]

It is interesting to think we could have a world where Ithers who arent like us exist too. But if that were the case, they would be some kind of law to regulate it. Anyway I think clone or not, as long they have our nature, they should be allowed to live with full privileges

[Kelyn]

It is interesting to think we could have a world where Ithers who arent like us exist too. But if that were the case, they would be some kind of law to regulate it. Anyway I think clone or not, as long they have our nature, they should be allowed to live with full privileges

I agree that having 'others' besides ourselves in our world is an interesting concept, especially if we're expected to treat them as equals. If you think about it enough, it's kind of hard to wrap your head around. I do agree, however, (as is evident from my comments) that the clones of ourselves, being in all ways identical, are indeed human and thus have our nature. As such, they deserve the same privileges and rights that we enjoy. Thanks for stopping in and sharing your thoughts with us!