Clone Clone Clone Clone Clone

In searching for various positions on the cloned food debate, and to make sure people were actually talking about it (because it is embarrassingly, and mysteriously, absent from the election's hot topics), I came across this argument for cloning (the article below). I fear that the points raised in this article will be the "well..DUH!" mantra for supporters of cloning, and many of you will nod your head in agreement. At times it reads as if the student was paid off by the local corporate farm, at other times it sounds like the corporate farm wrote it. The student really shows naivity in his/her age (no author listed)...this quote in particular...

As the youth of this country, we must all strive to be forward-thinking, not necessarily as a cure for recession or world hunger, but generally as a cure for the closed-minded, Christianity-induced thinking of older generations.

First off, I don't see much world hunger in the bellies of America, the world's fattest country. Maybe the world's food supply could be less concentrated before claiming that cloning will save the world. After all, corporate farms aren't going to give away cloned cows. They don't fall off a cloned-cow tree. Although scientists would probably make one of those if they could.

It is quite ignorant to align cloning with progressive thought, and that those against cloning are all creation-crazy Christians living in the stone age. Quite ignorant. Firstly, the idea of morality is not exclusive to those that believe in a higher power. I am quite sure that atheists adhere to every one of the common-sense Ten Commandments that is not God-related. And if cloning humans is immoral, then why is cloning animals OK? Supporters of the cloned meat say, "We should have firm laws that strictly forbid the cloning of humans." Really? Because to me, they got the snowball rolling and it will only be a matter of time. Especially if our selfish, Humanist desires call for it. Those laws will change in a heartbeat.

There is a great contradiction in Science, with the capital "S" meaning it is indeed a body of people with their own religion. The pre-history of the world, the size of the "ever-expanding" universe, and the beginnings of mankind can never be proven and are all theory, also known as faith. If the world of Science wants to call things theory, which is unproven, they should probably stop touting it as fact. Because they believe in it so fervently, with no observed proof, then it should be called a faith!

Back to the contradiction, and it can be applied to the cloning of animals. Science, and the ever-so-clever people with the Darwinist "fish with feet" on their cars, yet the Christian fish symbol represents Jesus Christ and has no affiliation with Genesis or the creation debate (despite what a fundamentalist will tell you)...they are in love with everything Darwin, evolution, and natural selection. He is their Clubber Lang in the corner versus creationists. However, isn't cloning just a slap in the face of Darwin's natural selection? Doesn't stem-cell research go against everything he taught? How can there be natural selection when we use science to keep people alive longer than probability has determined they should live? I have never read Darwin's books, but from what I have read, it sounds like he was a total naturalist, and that creating life in Petri dishes has nothing to do with Charles Darwin. I am sure there are naturalist Darwinists that do not bow at the feet of Science, but they aren't as loud.

There is as much, if not more, arrogant zealotry in Science and atheism than there is in any fundamentalist branch of any religion. Despite what various media would have you believe, religion has been the minority for hundreds of years. Not people that say they believe in God to a Gallup poll, but those that live it. Especially since the Enlightenment (the namesake has nothing to do with a move away from religion), secular Humanism is the mainstream. As many would have you believe, Christianity has never been the source of the untold amounts of violence through history. It was the secular governments who used Christianity as a political binder to meet their needs. (The questionable, violent, overtly political, and heretic, activities of the Roman Catholic Church are another beast.) Everything Jesus said in the Gospels implies anarchy, a peaceful absense of flags, borders, and government [not chaos]. For every 100 midguided soldiers that bore crosses, there was a solitary, stinky, hippie monk that read, prayed, and never bore arms. One of them follows the Gospels, one does not.

So yeah, cloning is a dark, dark, path...not "forward thinking" as the author implies.

_______________________________________________________
FDA embraces changing standards
2/7/2008

We have played with the possibilities of cloning for decades in our imaginations, shown in all kinds of media. But ever since the Food and Drug Administration gave the okay last month for food and milk obtained from some cloned farm animals our brains have stopped in their tracks.

This means the United States might be the first country to sell food from cloned animals in grocery stores.

This also means that the United States might be the forerunner in stopping world hunger and at the same time combating obesity with healthier foods.

So, why are people still searching hectically in their minds for a reason not to clone? Instead, why are they not putting the issue of cloned foods up there with global warming and the war in Iraq?

Although it may sound strange to put cloning in those same categories, we should think about our country's recession.

This is a whole new trade embargo that could secure the safety of America's economy.

As the youth of this country, we must all strive to be forward-thinking, not necessarily as a cure for recession or world hunger, but generally as a cure for the closed-minded, Christianity-induced thinking of older generations.

In other words, people for cloning should not be thought of as "playing God."

Change is not all bad and scientific research should not be postponed simply because people are not ready to accept higher standards of responsibility.

Cloning farm animals is just another type of artificial insemination.

But instead of thinking of cloning as a normalcy, people are turning away from the idea of cloned foods, because it sounds "weird."

This is the same as not trying some food on your plate because of its color or texture.

According to an article in the New York Times, the International Dairy Foods Association surveyed women, the main household decision makers on dairy products, and found 14 percent of them would turn away from cloned dairy products.

At the same time, farmers are drinking the milk of their cloned cows so as not to waste it and pour it down the drain.

The biggest caution to the FDA, it seems, is consumer's unwillingness to accept the new commodity, despite the fact that they know little or nothing about cloning.

Cloning involves creating a new organism by copying the genetic material in a different organism. The DNA is then placed in a liquid culture, containing nutrients.

An unfertilized egg is taken from a female and its nucleus removed.

The DNA is then placed in it, creating an embryo that is then placed into a mother of the same species. This genetically makes an identical copy.

The point is to keep an open mind, do the research and think about the possibilities this science has to offer.

Who knows? Maybe when you are older, cloning might save your life.