I'm not sure about the ethical argument. I guess it all depends on what happens to the clones. What is their purpose? How will they be "used." Will they have full rights as humans and citizens? Will they degenerate, as in fall apart, faster than humans? Will they be used by the military? Will they replace loved ones? Our technology outpaces our ethics. Good post.

I'm not sure what the application would be for most people. It can't be as fun as sex and it would be an evolutionary impediment long term. If you clone yourself, you end up with a baby you, but it won't be you exactly because the experience of the baby will be different than yours. Different memories, different attitudes, etc. I don't know if I would like to see myself being a teenager again. If I grew up to be a Republican, I'd have to kill myself. Would that be classified as suicide?

The only ethical problem I could see is if people start believing they own their clones. Clones will just be another person. Aside from an option for reproduction people have debated clones you keep as a vegetable and harvest their organs for medical emergencies which sounds kinda dark. The idea of cloning itself isn't unethical nor should it be illegal. We just have to have more moral discussions once it's legalized. The movie "The Island" is a decent example of cloning ethics.

Way too many humans now ... what we don't need is duplicates !

The religious push back, which is what most of this ethical hue and cry is about, revolves around the notion of soul. There are other issues to be sure, but soul is the biggie, especially among fundamentalist born again evangelicals. One way they make this less obvious is by pushing hard on the slippery slope nonsense.

I have a hard time seeing any ethics problems with cloning. There would be a genetic downside if too many of each individual were produced, but I can't see any potential reason why that would happen.

A bit of humor here: Imagine a clone that the woo masters have declared has no soul also chooses to be an atheist. Imagine the fear and anger in some circles. Worse than the antichrist. Mercy.

One of my novels dealt peripherally with the idea of cloning and what it means to be human.

Removing religion from the equation removes any ethical questions that don't already apply to anybody else who isn't a clone.

I don't see why there's such a fuss at the moment as we cannot clone thoughts , memories and feelings etc . All you got is another human that has similar cells a true clone would have your memories , feelings etc .....never gonna happen with our technology . There still isn't a need for it as we can still reproduce when the sperm count for humanity is zero that's when we will need to start cloning

I have no problem ethically, but I saw a video of those monkeys and they act like something is seriously wrong with them.

If I can have a clone that goes to work for me, I have no problem with the concept.

Without "God" the ethics of cloning become easier. I would support the idea as long as the human clone doesn't live it's entire life in the lab.

What is moral is the next question!
Cloning humans will be done regardless of what we think.
My concern will be how to protect the Clone's Human Rights!
un·eth·I·cal
??n?eTH?k(?)l/Submit
adjective
not morally correct.
"it is unethical to torment any creature for entertainment"
synonyms: immoral, amoral, unprincipled, unscrupulous, dishonorable, dishonest, wrong, deceitful, unconscionable, unfair, fraudulent, underhanded, wicked, evil, sneaky, corrupt; unprofessional, improper
"unethical methods"

Think Russia has been doing t for years. Our moral code is to high in government to do such things. lol