Clones?

Good point. Fraternal twins aren't really twins. They're two siblings from two different fertilized eggs that happen to share the womb at the same time.

The reason this happens is because once in a blue moon, the uterus releases two mature eggs instead of one. So fraternam twins, aside from having the same birthday, are no more related genetically than a brother and sister would be. (This is why a boy/girl combo is the most common combination among fraternal twins, about 50%. Girl/girl and boy/boy account for 25% each).

With identical twins, they start as a single egg. After fertilization, the egg splits into two identical eggs, each resulting in two genetically identical fetuses. Identical twins are always the same gender, and have the same genetic traits: eye/hair color, skin color, freckles, etc. Also note that some traits, such as fingerprints and freckle/mole dispersal patterns are random, and will not be identical.

 

As noted above, fingerprints are random, not genetic. However, some of the fingerprint patterns (swirls, circles, etc), are genetic, and identical twins share these.

 

There is no explanation at this time why fingerprints and freckles, as John has stated, are randomly different. So, somewhere, something is different, but that has not been discovered, yet.

 

Because they're RANDOM!!! If you clone a dalmation, it's spots will not be identical. They occur in a genetically predifined rate, but where they land is determined by chance.

Imaging dropping 50 pennies on the ground. They land in completely random areas, even though they have the same number of pennies. The 50 pennies is a genetic trait. Where they land is completely by chance.

 

Nothing happens by chance, especially concerning a human. Do you really think that we know everything about dna? A fingerprint is a very good example for individuality.

John, do you believe clones are God's doing? Not twins, but the clone itself?

 

Let's take a step back. Do you think that individuals who are the product of en vitro fertilization (removing eggs and sperm, fertilizing them in a dish, and implanting them in a uterus) are of God's doing, then yes, I'd say the same for cloning. If not, then I say no.

Ultimately, however, I'm against cloning for the purpose of creating fertilized eggs for reproduction. I am, however, in favor of cloning of individual organs and tissues.

SIDEBAR: The term "cloning" has gotten a bad rap, thanks in part to science fiction tales of the day. In reality, cloning has been done for centuries. When you take a cutting from a plant and induce the cutting to grow new roots, you're engaging in cloning. Every use yeast in cooking? You're taking part in the cloning of bacteria that result in bread rising.

As far as fingerprints and freckles, God "drops the pennies" and allows them to rest where they've landed. So yes, they're random.

 

How can this be done without a body? Or are you stating you are in favor of producing bodies to harvest organs? I also believe the cloning "name" has rightly been given the bad name because of what they are doing with it today. A plant is whast it is, as is cultures for yeast. These are far from animals, and even farther from humans.

 

No, I'm not in favor of full body cloning for the purpose of harvesting organs. As I said earlier, I believe a cloned individual has a soul, and therefore is a human being with all the rights thereof. However, work in the field is being done to eventually grow, for example, a new heart from your own damaged heart tissue. Your damaged heart would be replaced with a new heart grown (cloned) directly from your own body. The result wout be a heart that will not get rejected by your body, as happens with transplants now.

BTW - your liver is a self cloning organ. If it's damaged, the healthy liver cells will divide and replicate new cells to replace the damaged tissue. You can donate part of your healthy liver to a family member with a damaged liver. The "missing" [art of your iver will replicate and replace the damaged tissue.

 

Trying to stick in a little of what we know in genetics about cloning here...

First, it is becoming more and more evident that all the bits of heredity do NOT lie in the DNA and RNA. There is some decent evidence that even the cellular membrane holds some clues as to what is going on in terms of physical structure.

Second, yes spots are the result of heredity -- and where the spots will be and how dark they will be also is. It simply doesn't seem to be the province of the DNA! However, spots on butterfly wings ARE determined by the DNA. Go figure...

Yes, organs can be cloned without cloning the whole person. Host organisms can be 'teased' into growing a cloned organ for harvesting. Pigs and cattles are already being used for some experiments here and the organs seem to be growing quite nicely. I am not aware, at this point however, of any transplants to humans of these cloned organs. Maybe someone is more up on the current reports than I am here.

The word translated 'soul' in Genesis is 'nephesh', which also means 'breath of life'. Animals also have this. In fact the animals originally made vegetarian in Genesis 1:30 all had nephesh, or soul. These were also the animals taken on the Ark during the Flood. Essentially, 'nephesh', or 'soul', is the unique personality expressed through the central nervous system. It is in spirit that man is created differently from the rest of the physical creation -- and the way he is created in the image of God (whom Jesus told the woman at the well, is Spirit -- John 2:24).

Therefore, unless a cloned animal or person was simply a vegetable without a working central nervous system, there would be a unique personality involved, or a soul. For once that individual or organism is alive, it is alive by the grace of God no matter how it came to be (most clone attempts are total failures), and the individuality is also granted by Him.

There might be an argument over whether a cloned human being would have a spirit or not, but the marks of a spirit in man are things like the ability to use language, appreciate beauty for its own sake, comprehend the idea of right and wrong apart from punishment and reward, etc. Should the cloned human being show these evidences of being entirely different from animals, then I think there would be evidence of a spirit present.

Life is in the hands of the Lord. He can prevent or allow life through cloning.

Considering the failure rate, however, and the numbers of physical abnormalities involves with the 'successes', I'm personally pretty convinced that God's way of having babies ranks way higher than cloning in a lab!

 

Our pastor says that cloning is like creating a twin, but as we all know there are definite differences among twins and such.

Cheryl<><

 

Johnv, how much of a body can we clone before it has a soul. Let me ask it this way if a quad from a car wreck (no genetic disfunction) clones a body from the neck down - grows this body to an age that will hold up the head and attaches the head to the body. At the same time as the operation is finished the father of the head dies, leaving a large estate to the child, who gets the estate the head or the body and how can you give positive identification as the client is dead and unable to clam the estate and as you pointed out before the finger prints would be different and the DNA evidence with a non matching finger print would prove to the court that we have a twin (who has what soul?). Or if you could get around that who will get the SSAN - or the check at the age of what Body part? How long or how many times can this head or brain keep replacing it's body? And how many generations of trade will be legal and who will make that choice? The human life will crush itself from the curse of Adam, only God can give us real eternal life and joy. The worship of the flesh in the fountain of youth is a lie from Satan. Clone work like much of replacement and artificial extension of life is a lie from hell. I think the only reason we see it at this time is because we are getting ready to have a man that will seem to come back from the dead by a miracle of the mind of man. God says to man “so you can make life?”, he smiles and tells man “then get your own dirt.” Don’t worry too much, soon what will matter is how many times you shared the chance for another soul to come to Christ , when you gave in love and walked in sacrificial obedience to the Father. A life lived well and short is better by far than a life lived long and bad. I will not resist God's will to keep me in this land, but far better is the Kingdom of my Lord Jesus Christ than anything this life offers! Take me now, father and I am blessed! I live for that day and serve in this land only to that end.

Ken ><KJV>

 

Well, you know what they say... It's better to quit while you're a head.

Generally, it's accepted that, without a brain, we're not alive. The body can't exist without one. Likewise, if our brain dies, we're considered dead. I could answer your question from a biological scientific point, or from an emotional point. Either way, neither answer sounds complete, so perhaps that's best suited for a time in the future that we can actually do these things.

In the case of a quarropelegic, however, what is required is a new spinal column. That might be possible someday.

But in retrospect, I remember when the world was up un arms about en vitro fertilization and us "playing God". Today it's somewhat of a well-known practice.