So it is possable up to the point they were killed, i wonder if they could grow to the stage of an infant, or toddler.
That is exactly what I said and that is what it is.
On a side note, it worries me that that is all you "got from the web".
As far as definition goes. If that is all a clone is, then it is a twin. I fail to see the difference.
Some twins although rare are identical down to fingerprints same DNA and so on. But I wouldn't say that they are not individuals. What makes people individual is not our DNA but our experiance. Unless you cqn copy experiance you can't copy people
To take a break from the cloning talk and get back to the original post...
The Christian objection to embryonic stem cell research has nothing to do with cloning (though Christians usually have issues with that too). The objection is that life is destroyed. In the abortion debate Christians contend that life begins at conception. Embryonic stem cell research obviously happens after embryos are conceived. This is actually one of the areas where Christians remain fairly consistent in their view.
As far as progression of stem cell research, everything I have read has shown that work on adult stem cells has progressed further and has had better results than work on embryonic stem cells.
The Christian objection to embryonic stem cell research has nothing to do with cloning (though Christians usually have issues with that too). The objection is that life is destroyed. In the abortion debate Christians contend that life begins at conception. Embryonic stem cell research obviously happens after embryos are conceived. This is actually one of the areas where Christians remain fairly consistent in their view.
As far as progression of stem cell research, everything I have read has shown that work on adult stem cells has progressed further and has had better results than work on embryonic stem cells.
Agreed. But unlike a brain dead vegetable a zygote can become a person. That potential is why they need to be protected.
An egg or sperm can also become a person...
And in nature spontaneous abortion (purposeful abortion that happens in certain instances such as when the animal is in danger because the chances of infant survival are low) happens in many species including rats. Humans make it a conscious call.
They need eachother and they can. They also need a lot of other things- nutrients, womb-like conditions, etc. A zygote also needs a lot of these things.
And technically, some eggs (haven't seen it in humans yet though [unless you buy the Virgin Mary account- which I don't]) can grow without fertilization through parthenogenesis.
In a way it is- it depends on how you define human life. One can just as easily argue that a zygote is also not human yet.
I agree to, but unlike a health living newborn an embryo is not.a person, an individual or even a being. It is more like a seed.
Human life means human. a zygote is not a human. But it contains the things necessary to become one without outside involve ment.
A sperm cell will simply die. A sperm cell can not grow into a person. Just like a brick is not a house. It is part, it is necessary, but it is a part, not a whole
A zygote needs plenty of outside involvement to grow- nutrients, vitamins, a proper waste disposal system, immune protection, etc.
I don't think the political nature of the research would stop people from publishing results. If you are doing the research you don't care about the politics.
Also, I have to ask for clarification, what do you mean by "life?" If life begins at conception, but it is not a person, then what sort of life begins?
it has to be a person to be alive.
Life begins at conception because that is where it starts growing. A zygote isn't a person because it lacks the properties of humanity. It has no brain, no intelligence. It is tissue. Unique tissue but it isn't a person because it is a zygote.
I am not saying anything against adult stemcell research. Just its odd how the answer people wanted to be true is true
Similar threads
