NationStates Jolt Archive

The government of Qallegnia thinks that this is the real way to deal with cloning...

Ban on Human Cloning

Category: Moral Decency
Strength: Mild
Description: Whereas the cloning of humans and research towards the cloning of humans does or could take place in much of the NationStates world,

Whereas such cloning leads to humans who have been created by other humans, a situation that perverts the laws of nature,

Whereas a mistake made in such cloning could cause serious defects or medical problems in the resulting person, thus potentially condemning them to a life of misery,

Whereas these deficiencies in cloning combine to make it a very bad thing,

the United Nations resolves that the cloning of humans is hereby banned in all member states, and resolves furthermore that member states and their constituents shall refrain from conducting, financing, facilitating or otherwise materially and directly supporting such cloning, and

further resolves that this resolution shall not be construed to limit the rights of already-existing clones, nor the rights of clones created illegally or outside of a UN member state after the passage of this resolution.

In addition to appeals to emotion and other logical fallacies, this proposal is also illegal due to contradiction of existing resolutions protecting clones' right to exist.BioRights Declaration (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=7030146&postcount=57)

Now can we stop it with the myriad cloning threads at least until you new players have taken the time to read what's already passed?

Wolfgang rolls his eyes. "My race are all artificially created by cloning technology, though our DNA is distinctive. Please stop trying to legislate the extinction of my people." He reads the wording of the proposal again. "Oh, I guess if it's just full-blooded humans you're trying to legislate against, then we don't care. Ciao!" Wolfgang stands, and walks his cyborg, artificially-created, multi-species, engineered self from the room.

In addition to appeals to emotion and other logical fallacies, this proposal is also illegal due to contradiction of existing resolutions protecting clones' right to exist.

Now can we stop it with the myriad cloning threads at least until you new players have taken the time to read what's already passed?

I disagree. I read that resolution before starting, actually, and it only protects the rights of already-existing clones. This resolution only limits the rights of cloners. They do have a right to exist, but they don't have a right to be created. (Unless I'm missing a resolution that gives them that right?)

"Oh, I guess if it's just full-blooded humans you're trying to legislate against, then we don't care. Ciao!" Wolfgang stands, and walks his cyborg, artificially-created, multi-species, engineered self from the room.

Yes, that was the intent.

The Theocracy of Judeastan, in keeping with preexisting U.N laws, accepts the rights of cloned persons to live in its borders, and enjoy the same rights as non-cloned persons. However, it objects to the continuation of this practice, on the grounds that we believe it to be an irresponsible and immoral decision on the part of the scientific community, the human being, we believe, is not a play-thing.

Furthermore, the Theocracy of Judeastan will draft a proposal in the near future , which protects the rights of cloned persons, but which will make the practice a violation of U.N. law. This resolution will however, not be retroactive.

In addition to appeals to emotion and other logical fallacies, this proposal is also illegal due to contradiction of existing resolutions protecting clones' right to exist.

OOC: Sorry, Fris, but I've got to disagree. This doesn't say or do anything about existing clones (in fact it's quite explicit about that). It's a Really Bad Idea for all sorts of reasons, but I can't see it contradicting the BioRights Declaration.

Whereas the cloning of humans and research towards the cloning of humans does or could take place in much of the NationStates world,
So?
Whereas such cloning leads to humans who have been created by other humans, a situation that perverts the laws of nature,
Says who?
Whereas a mistake made in such cloning could cause serious defects or medical problems in the resulting person, thus potentially condemning them to a life of misery,
Lots of people are born with natural birth defects. Should we ban having babies?
Whereas these deficiencies in cloning combine to make it a very bad thing,
You've listed a grand total of one "deficiency" and it's a weak argument at best.
the United Nations resolves that the cloning of humans is hereby banned in all member states, and resolves furthermore that member states and their constituents shall refrain from conducting, financing, facilitating or otherwise materially and directly supporting such cloning, and
Not only does this ban therapeutic cloning as well as reproductive cloning, it completely ignores non-human sapients.
further resolves that this resolution shall not be construed to limit the rights of already-existing clones, nor the rights of clones created illegally or outside of a UN member state after the passage of this resolution.
Well at least one part of this proposal isn't idiotic.

Ironically, I check my nation and I find this:

Cloning Research Promises New Breakthrough
The Issue

Scientists using cloned human embryos for research are on the verge of a medical breakthrough.

The Debate

1. "It's really very exciting," says lab head Beth Hamilton. "Until now, we've kept very quiet, to avoid being targeted by lunatic fringe groups who for some reason think it's wrong to clone human embryos. It's too early to promise anything, but we hope that one day we will have genetic cures for a whole range of debilitating illnesses. I certainly hope the government will support our work."

This is the position your government is preparing to adopt.

2. "Well, if you have to be part of a lunatic fringe group to object to this barbaric practice, I'm a lunatic," says placard-waving protestor Stephanie Trax. "Of course it would be nice to cure these unnamed diseases, but at what cost? They're messing with the sanctity of human life. It's wrong, and the lab should be shut down immediately."
[Accept]

We in the Technocracy oppose any measure that would ban cloning. The argument that it's "not natural" makes no sense. If you followed that, then I expect your nation's citizens to all be naked, for example... not that there's anything wrong with that, of course, but it's certainly not "natural" to go around with artificial textiles draped over one's "natural" body.

We in the Technocracy oppose any measure that would ban cloning. The argument that it's "not natural" makes no sense. If you followed that, then I expect your nation's citizens to all be naked, for example... not that there's anything wrong with that, of course, but it's certainly not "natural" to go around with artificial textiles draped over one's "natural" body.

The Theocracy of Judeastan is very frustrated by your narrow view of the issue. It seems that you paint broad strokes with black and white ink. The deas of clothing and cloning are incomparable, since man is, for the most part, compelled to clothe himself, call it what you will, this behavior is a part of human nature, especially when in social situations. Technocracy also seems to be under the misconception that there is only one main argument against cloning, but yet it does not cite the logical argument that cloning will exhaust the Earth's resources, as the population would increase rapidly. Also, we would breech our carrying capacity(if we haven't already), and we would be in danger of extinction.

The Theocracy of Judeastan is very frustrated by your narrow view of the issue. It seems that you paint broad strokes with black and white ink. The deas of clothing and cloning are incomparable, since man is, for the most part, compelled to clothe himself, call it what you will, this behavior is a part of human nature, especially when in social situations. Technocracy also seems to be under the misconception that there is only one main argument against cloning, but yet it does not cite the logical argument that cloning will exhaust the Earth's resources, as the population would increase rapidly. Also, we would breech our carrying capacity(if we haven't already), and we would be in danger of extinction.

Our objection was not meant to be comprehensive, which is why only one argument was brought up. The idea of cloning exhausting the world's resources does warrant some attention, but your proposal does not mention it at all. Also, the impact of cloning on world population is and would be minuscule compared with explosive birth rate. If you wish to use resource scarcity as a rationale, then family planning resolutions would be far more beneficial.

Our objection was not meant to be comprehensive, which is why only one argument was brought up. The idea of cloning exhausting the world's resources does warrant some attention, but your proposal does not mention it at all. Also, the impact of cloning on world population is and would be minuscule compared with explosive birth rate. If you wish to use resource scarcity as a rationale, then family planning resolutions would be far more beneficial.

We contend that if cloning is legalized, people will want to make many clones of themselves, as a means of preserving, as it were, their being, in addition to many other reasons why cloning will result in a population boom. Also, when one person is conceived through normal sexual reproduction, he/she will have a 1/2 chance of being a reproductive receptacle(i.e., female), and will hence have only that chance of bearing children when older. A clone can, according to Judeastan's understanding, be made into a woman, without probability being an issue. Due to the danger of a rapid increase of female clones, Judeastan's fears are justified. Family planning will not solve a population crisis, as people hardly ever follow non-mandatory government programs. Rather, limitations placed on the number of children a couple can have is the preferred choice.

humans who have been created by other humans, a situation that perverts the laws of nature

Does this mean sexual procreation is a perversion of the laws of nature? Sexual reproduction is all about humans creating other humans...

Anyway, my country sees no reason to enforce an international ban on cloning, even if we don't do cloning ourselves.


Christophe Boco (http://ns.goobergunch.net/wiki/index.php/Christophe_Boco),
Ambassador to the United Nations,
PDSRA

OK, I've tried to take the comments into account and have came up with another draft.

Human Cloning Precautions

Category: Moral Decency
Strength: Mild
Description: Whereas the cloning of humans and research towards the cloning of humans does or could take place in much of the NationStates world,

Whereas cloning and its consequences are not fully understood in many parts of the same world,

Whereas a mistake made in such cloning could cause serious defects or medical problems in the resulting person, thus potentially condemning them to a life of misery,

Whereas having two or more people with the same DNA could lead to serious problems in forensics and other areas where identity is important,

Whereas a tangled web of procreation and cloning could lead to serious corruption of the gene pool,

Whereas, however, that although these issues combine to put the validity of cloning in serious doubt at the conventional level of understanding, some or many nations may have reached the level of technology and expertise that cloning is appropriate or even necessary for their survival,

the General Assembly of the United Nations, in general General Assembly assembled, hereby resolves that:

(1) Neither nations nor their constituents shall undertake the process of reproductive cloning of sentient beings when they do not have a full understanding of the process, its consequences, and possible benefits and risks, as well as the responsibility of caring for the resulting clone until such time as it can do so for itself.

(2) This resolution shall not be in any way construed to limit the rights of people created as the result of cloning below the rights of people not created as the result of cloning.

Whereas the cloning of humans and research towards the cloning of humans does or could take place in much of the NationStates world,
Sure. Now tell me what's wrong with that.
Whereas cloning and its consequences are not fully understood in many parts of the same world,
Alright, I'll give you that.
Whereas a mistake made in such cloning could cause serious defects or medical problems in the resulting person, thus potentially condemning them to a life of misery,
The same is true of almost any medical procedure.
Whereas having two or more people with the same DNA could lead to serious problems in forensics and other areas where identity is important,
Ban twins!
Whereas a tangled web of procreation and cloning could lead to serious corruption of the gene pool,
Since the UN has already legalized incest, that isn't going to cut it.
Whereas, however, that although these issues combine to put the validity of cloning in serious doubt at the conventional level of understanding, some or many nations may have reached the level of technology and expertise that cloning is appropriate or even necessary for their survival,
And?
the General Assembly of the United Nations, in general General Assembly assembled, hereby resolves that:
Here comes the good part!
(1) Neither nations nor their constituents shall undertake the process of reproductive cloning of sentient beings when they do not have a full understanding of the process, its consequences, and possible benefits and risks, as well as the responsibility of caring for the resulting clone until such time as it can do so for itself.
Any nation can say that it has the knowledge. So this does next to nothing. (Also, you use "human" everywhere else but "sentient being" here.)
(2) This resolution shall not be in any way construed to limit the rights of people created as the result of cloning below the rights of people not created as the result of cloning.
Alright.

The same is true of almost any medical procedure.

So?

Ban twins!

I'll give you that.

Since the UN has already legalized incest, that isn't going to cut it.

How is that an argument against it? You're saying "we've hurt the gene pool in one way, so that makes it okay to make it worse. Also, many cultures have taboos on incest that may not apply to those doing cloning.


Any nation can say that it has the knowledge. So this does next to nothing. (Also, you use "human" everywhere else but "sentient being" here.)

Well, yes, it's not a hard-handed resolution [anymore], since I figured nations are too different for that to work. And I'll fix up the terminology.

The government of Qallegnia thinks that this is the real way to deal with cloning...
Good idea, but no. It's messing with nature, but it hurts no one's feelings. Those who want to ban cloning have no consideration for those who want to be cloned and should try and think about those people {No offense}.:confused::(:confused.

With all due respect, let us come up with a better solution. Those who want to be cloned can, and those who don't want to don't have to!

So?
So that isn't an argument.
I'll give you that.
Good.
How is that an argument against it? You're saying "we've hurt the gene pool in one way, so that makes it okay to make it worse. Also, many cultures have taboos on incest that may not apply to those doing cloning.
So, essentially, you're against cloning because it ISN'T taboo?
Well, yes, it's not a hard-handed resolution [anymore], since I figured nations are too different for that to work..
Correct. It is a completely pointless resolution that does nothing at all.

So that isn't an argument.

No, it's saying that a dangerous procedure shouldn't be done, without understanding, for the sake of itself. Would you want coronary bypass surgery if you weren't having a heart attack?

So, essentially, you're against cloning because it ISN'T taboo?

How did you get that idea from my post? I'm saying that neither of them should be allowed under (OOC: RL) generally assumed circumstances, so just because one is doesn't mean the other should be.

Correct. It is a completely pointless resolution that does nothing at all.

Actually, it does a few things:

(1) Serves as a blocker against many clone army proposals,
(2) States the stance of the UN that cloning is a dangerous subject that should be treated carefully,
(3) Urges nations to be careful with cloning.

Actually, it does a few things:

(1) Serves as a blocker against many clone army proposals,
Nope. The BioRights Declaration does that just much more effectively than this ever could.

(2) States the stance of the UN that cloning is a dangerous subject that should be treated carefully,
A declaration that is worth it's weight in, well, nothing.

(3) Urges nations to be careful with cloning.
Actually it doesn't. It requires them to know all about the subject, but once they do they can be as careless as they like. No urging of anyone about anything is done.

There is the bit that looks like it was meant to be about supporting clones until they can fend for themselves, but which is actually gibberish. Was that what you meant?

(1) Serves as a blocker against many clone army proposals,
The mods take care of that; it's a non-issue.

(2) States the stance of the UN that cloning is a dangerous subject that should be treated carefully,
You take the stance of those who have not already perfected cloning. And how is cloning dangerous?

(3) Urges nations to be careful with cloning.
Those that care already are.

Your proposal does nothing.

All I see is all these myriad cloning proposals that are getting on my nerves.

Get off the bandwagon before it topples off a cliff.

~Dr. Jules Hodz

(A two foot tall, six foot long velociraptor hops onto it's desk. Ruffling it's feathers in preparation first. It says, "Grlgrlgrlgrl greeeee kraaaaaa!" Afterwards it stoops for a few moments in a sign of embarasment. It then fixes it's mistake by reaching up and with a clawed hand swiching on a translater around it's neck. Now repeating itself...) I am Sharp Tooth representative of the Raptor Pack. I mean to express my peoples support of the basic princaple of this proposal. Natural selection should remain natural. No cheating evolution. Otherwise you retard your species natural advancement. Let nature take it's course. Well wait, this only involves humans right? Nevermind. I'm leaving. You smell of meat, and I'm getting hungry.

No, it's saying that a dangerous procedure shouldn't be done, without understanding, for the sake of itself.

A dangerous procedure? Half of emergancy medicine uses "Dangerous procedures". For example a trachiectomy is a dangerous procedure and as often as not is carried out without the patients understanding, and in a minority (an extreme one) of cases is carried out without the full comprehension of the person who is performing the surgery.

In essence what I am saying is, who's understanding? the "patients" or the scientists/doctors?

Equally, science would basically halt if "dangerous procedures" weren't carried out without full understanding. I think that in essence your proposal has merit but needs to be less open for interpretation. Simply saying "Without understanding" gives alot of scope and is too loose of a phrase to have much of a reason in a UNR.

You need to tighten it's scope, make them more of guidelines....

Ban twins!

Sorry for double posting but this just occured to me...

Twins don't always have identical DNA, it's the same with fingerprints.

Sorry for double posting but this just occured to me...

Twins don't always have identical DNA, it's the same with fingerprints.

Identical ones do (barring a mutation).

A dangerous procedure? Half of emergancy medicine uses "Dangerous procedures". For example a trachiectomy is a dangerous procedure and as often as not is carried out without the patients understanding, and in a minority (an extreme one) of cases is carried out without the full comprehension of the person who is performing the surgery.

In essence what I am saying is, who's understanding? the "patients" or the scientists/doctors?

Equally, science would basically halt if "dangerous procedures" weren't carried out without full understanding. I think that in essence your proposal has merit but needs to be less open for interpretation. Simply saying "Without understanding" gives alot of scope and is too loose of a phrase to have much of a reason in a UNR.

You need to tighten it's scope, make them more of guidelines....

I'm having trouble seeing what's wrong with a simple, nonbinding resolution that nevertheless states the stance of the UN that cloning should be kept under control.

As of now, the United Socialist States of Great Kali (refered as USSGK in the future) has a split position on cloning.

Clones would make a good addition to the voting force, clones are people with rights, cloning organs could be the medical breaktrough of the new millenium and to a certain extent, clones would become very good soldiers if the you can reproduce your best soldier.

and on the other side... lets say a clone kills the original or vice verca as clones are people too... the CSIs would eventualy have to conclude suicide... as if they look for prints... they find the victim's printe. if they look for DNA samples, they find the victim's DNA and so on. So Clones could be used as hyper assasins and this is the only real debate here.

If clones can have an "against the law" use, then it's sure that the USSGK will stand against it as we already struggle enough to keep the law upholded. but then, if the debate is so tough to seperate, the UN should only rule that each countries have the liberty to legislate on cloning by themseves.

Thankfully
USSGK UN delegate

How can anyone say that cloning isn't natural? We are creatures of nature right? And if we have evolved in nature to a level where cloning is possible it is complitely natural thing to do! There are insects and plants that clone themself, should we ban them aswell?

How can anyone say that cloning isn't natural? We are creatures of nature right? And if we have evolved in nature to a level where cloning is possible it is complitely natural thing to do! There are insects and plants that clone themself, should we ban them aswell?

So what you're saying is that we're not responsible for our actions?

President Barttlet stares at the video feed of the GA activities, yet another cloning ban to come to the floor! Good God, I have to push finding a new ambassador at large for the UN to the top of the pile, Donatella is too good for this crap. He presses the button on the intercom, Mrs Landing he calls, please send Donatella some flowers.