wouldnt it technically have a copy of YOURE soul?

owlflame : See, that's my question. I believe that God is the only one who creates/gives souls. It would be very perplexing to me if human cloning were ever successful.

tRIUNE : well i think cloning a human would work but im not entirely sure its legal to clone a human.
I could,however,be wrong.

I was hoping I would not have to do this, but a lot of people made comments that made me do so. It seems a lot of people think that clones are just 'mindless zombies' or 'not real human beings'. Cloning goes NOT mean taking some piece of tissue and making an identical being at radical speed. In cloning, you take an unfertilized egg from a woman. You take out the nucleus (which is their DNA), and you simply replace it with the nucleus from a cell from another human. That egg is now a complete cell with the natural amount of genes and it develops naturally. They are born the same way, they develop the same way, and they uniquely experience things just like everyone else. Saying they aren't human is a prejudice against someone not 'fertilized' the same way you were.

That alone makes them no less 'human' than anyone else. One of the comments basically states that it isn't human because it was created unnaturally. So does that mean that when you have a person who can't have kids unless they have their eggs artificially fertilized in a petri dish has a soulless being as a son/daughter just because it was born unnaturally?

And for those people who say you can't clone souls, I agree. But what I believe is that when a living thing is created, it is God that gives them that soul, and that would include a clone. If you aren't given that soul, the body is lifeless (dead). So just the fact that the clone would be alive means God gave him/her that essential part of life.

Clones are NOT just a copy of the original. The only way you could hope to have a clone grow up and be the exact same way is to have it go through every single experience that the original went through at the exact point in his/her life that the original had that experience. A person is not just defined by their genetics. It is what we experience in life that makes us who we are. So a cloned human might have the same natural physical appearance as the original, but they are still a different person because they are living their own life. Remember, fraternal twins are indeed genetically identical to each other. Genetically speaking, a clone is absolutely no different from a fraternal twin. Even the way it happens is very similar. In cloning, we are just making that process happen later. Yet I don't see any debate that says one of the fraternal twins has no soul because it is just a copy of the original (which is exactly what they are in the zygonemic developmental stage of life).

And one last thing, there was one comment that said they have their own conscious as long as their brain fully developed. I am not trying to attack this poster, and I am sorry if it sounds like I am. But that is just like saying that someone who has mental retardation does not have their own conscious because their brains aren't fully developed. How normal your brain is does not determine if you have your own conscious.

In the end, if a human cloned actually survived the process, that means that God allowed the clone to live by granting an individual soul that is it's own and not a copy. You can't be alive without it.

legacyme3 : I agree with this kind of but if you have emotion and think like a normal human being your essentially made in the same image and likeness of god and w/e and anyway remember when you had 'Test tube babies' when they froze the sperm and stuff after a while it was accepted that they have souls so why wouldn't a clone? Like in the iron giant and I quote "if you can think and have emotion you've got a soul, he's not JUST a robot"  sorry not having a go just saying

no it's not possible they really are not natural so no i don't think so :/