Would a human clone have a soul?

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

Prov910

Senior Member
Jan 10, 2017
880
41
0
#1
Would a human clone have a soul?

Dolly the sheep made the news over 20 years ago. I think it is very likely that humans have been cloned by now. Oh, don't get me wrong. I'm not some sort of conspiracy nut. I just think that human cloning would be such an incredibly lucrative--albeit unethical--activity that some gov't or well heeled private organization somewhere has secretly been working on this. Granted, humans are *much* more difficult to clone than, say, sheep or cats or mice. But two decades is a long time to solve even the most difficult of problems. So I'm guess that somewhere in an out-of-the-way laboratory, there is a living human clone. Does he or she have a soul?
 
Jul 27, 2016
459
7
0
#2
This is a stupid question. But no, they wouldn't have.
 

Prov910

Senior Member
Jan 10, 2017
880
41
0
#4
This is a stupid question. But no, they wouldn't have.
A stupid question because you don't think there will ever be (or are) human clones? Or stupid because a clone is man-made, and therefore wouldn't have a soul? Or is it a stupid question for some other reason?
 

blue_ladybug

Senior Member
Feb 21, 2014
62,426
1,416
113
#5
Humans have already been cloned. It's a fact. They cloned a baby.
 

88

Senior Member
Nov 14, 2016
3,484
43
48
#6
Would a human clone have a soul?

Dolly the sheep made the news over 20 years ago. I think it is very likely that humans have been cloned by now. Oh, don't get me wrong. I'm not some sort of conspiracy nut. I just think that human cloning would be such an incredibly lucrative--albeit unethical--activity that some gov't or well heeled private organization somewhere has secretly been working on this. Granted, humans are *much* more difficult to clone than, say, sheep or cats or mice. But two decades is a long time to solve even the most difficult of problems. So I'm guess that somewhere in an out-of-the-way laboratory, there is a living human clone. Does he or she have a soul?
*** I think they would because they are a copy of a person: soul/spirit--- I think God would allow it that way, but I'm not sure...
 

seoulsearch

Senior Member
May 23, 2009
10,773
353
83
#7
This is a fascinating question.

I could be wrong, but in my limited understanding, isn't a clone pretty much a man-made genetically identical twin of another human being? Except that this "twin" would be produced through "scientific" means rather than "naturally".

I would think, and I could be wrong, that this would also be in the same category as babies/human beings who are produced through something like in vitro fertilization? Seeing as the fertilization is completed in a lab rather than in the womb... Do babies produced by these methods have a soul?

Personally, I consider these children to most definitely be "real people", and yes, I most certainly think they have souls.

I read an article a while back about two famous fashion designers who called in vitro babies "artificial' children, and not "real", which caused an uproar among their wealthy client base (many of whom who had children produced by this method.)

Human cloning among us almost seems to be an inevitable future, and I'm always interested in sci-fi movies that make predictions about its impact on society--including the thought that many in society will reject cloned human beings on the grounds that they are not "real".

I come from a country that very adamantly believes people like me are "not really human beings either", simply because I am adopted and have no "roots" (biological family that claims me and is "honorable").

These people firmly believe that I do not have a soul, either.
 
G

Galatea

Guest
#9
I agree with Seoulsearch, a clone would sort of like be an identical twin, just much younger. All humans have souls, even people who are comatose and considered by many to be "vegetables". The soul is still there, even if the body no longer functions in a way for the soul to express itself.
 

Adstar

Senior Member
Jul 24, 2016
2,871
174
63
#10
As far as i know Identical twins are genetic clones.. I am willing to be corrected on this? does anyone know for sure?
 

Magenta

Senior Member
Jul 3, 2015
23,391
1,335
113
#11
I would say that anything with the breath of life is a soul, since we do not "have" a soul,
but we are a living soul. Clones are not really a twin of the original because there are
many physical problems with clones that are not part of the prototype.

Identical twins come from a single fertilized egg, or zygote, that splits in two. Both halves contain the same DNA and eventually form two fetuses. But clones are formed in a different way. The first step in making a clone is to empty the DNA out of a fertilized egg. This egg will eventually house the DNA of your clone. Next you take DNA from the thing you want to clone, treat it in a certain way, and then put it into the empty fertilized egg. The fertilized egg is then put into a womb where it develops and grows. Clones also develop in different wombs, at different times. http://genetics.thetech.org/ask/ask415
 
S

Siberian_Khatru

Guest
#12
Yes. Science has perfected cloning to the point where even the soul is cloned.
 

seoulsearch

Senior Member
May 23, 2009
10,773
353
83
#13
Yes. Science has perfected cloning to the point where even the soul is cloned.
This is an even more fascinating question: Would any clones that were made have entirely unique, individual souls (I personally believe they would), or would their souls simply be copies, replicas, or pieces of the original?
 

Fenner

Senior Member
Jan 26, 2013
7,507
99
0
#14
I don't think it's a stupid question. I think they might, I mean they have all the other parts. It's creepy, I wish humanity wouldn't mess around with this stuff.
 

oldethennew

Senior Member
Feb 28, 2016
7,474
317
83
#15
how easily the human animal's minds are corrupted...especially since the 50's,
where the 'bube-tube/entertainment industry' has become the nipple/dictator
of today's existence...
 

Magenta

Senior Member
Jul 3, 2015
23,391
1,335
113
#16
This is an even more fascinating question: Would any clones that were made have entirely unique, individual souls (I personally believe they would), or would their souls simply be copies, replicas, or pieces of the original?
They develop, grow, and live in a completely different time and environment, so their life's experiences and outlook would be quite different.
 

seoulsearch

Senior Member
May 23, 2009
10,773
353
83
#17
They develop, grow, and live in a completely different time and environment, so their life's experiences and outlook would be quite different.
I completely agree. :)

But I'm betting some people would argue over whether or not it was like the soul of the original person was being duplicated, split up... and placed into several different petri dishes.

I myself personally believe that each living human being would be a real, individual person, and that each would have their own unique soul (just as a child's soul is unique from their parent's), but I could be wrong.

I wouldn't see cloned human beings as being any different from in vitro, or any other "type" of human being (but again, that's just me.)

Because if not, then the next set of questions that come in (and some movies have explored this) is, what kinds of rights do clones have?

Can clones be raised simply to harvest tissue and organs in order to keep non-cloned human beings (or even pets) alive? Can clones be raised as slaves or for sex trafficking, etc.?

The minute they're seen as "less than" human beings, or not human beings at all, is when the code of ethics will really hit the fan.

This is just one of the reasons why the thread's original question is actually a very important one.
 

maxwel

Senior Member
Apr 18, 2013
7,411
522
113
#18
The problem is not in finding an answer to the question.


The problem is that we have to ask these kinds of questions at all.
 

seoulsearch

Senior Member
May 23, 2009
10,773
353
83
#19
They develop, grow, and live in a completely different time and environment, so their life's experiences and outlook would be quite different.
This reminds me of a movie... I'm thinking it was "The Island"? (Sorry... I'm quite fascinated by this subject and have watched several films with clones as part of the story line.)

In the film I'm thinking of, wealthy patrons paid a corporation to raise clones of themselves in order to replace whatever they might need in the future. Some things were obvious--a heart transplant, or lungs that had been ravaged by cancer.

But what about a model who is in an accident, or her skin just isn't as smooth as it used to be? Forget a facelift. She had the corporation produce a clone for her so that she could have completely new, youthfully dewy skin.

I could be confusing movies, but I remember in one, a wealthy infertile couple (the wife could not produce a child on her own) had the wife cloned, and the clone was able to produce a child from their own genetic material, all within a lab.

The couple was told that the clones remained in vegetative states and never came to awareness or consciousness.

But in reality, the scientists found that without a full human interaction and experience, the clones failed to develop, and anything they produced was unusable. So, this couple fully believed that the wife's clone was raised in a state of complete unconsciousness, and yet was able to produce their child.

In reality, the wife's clone had to be raised in a controlled lab that replicated the human experience (including regular socialization with other clones and the scientists) so that she could grow as a complete human being. They impregnated her, allowed her to carry to full gestation, then aided her in giving birth--and killed her immediately after the baby was born.

The most heartbreaking scene is that this exhausted young woman eagerly asked the nurse if she could hold her baby, and the nurse shook her head no. The young woman's IV's were filled with lethal substances, and she died nearly immediately after that, while watching a nurse hold on to her baby. She was never allowed to even touch her own child.

To me, the case of a cloned human being is a lot like an unborn child.

If people believe a clone is just a mass of cells and not a true human being with no soul, it'll be easy for them to raise, harvest, and subsequently murder the clones after they've taken what they want (just like other animals.)

I personally do not believe God would agree with this, but that's just me. I just hope they get the ethical issues squared away BEFORE cloning become the norm in our society.
 
Last edited:

seoulsearch

Senior Member
May 23, 2009
10,773
353
83
#20
The problem is not in finding an answer to the question.


The problem is that we have to ask these kinds of questions at all.
One of the reasons I'm so interested in this subject is that, as an adoptee, I've come to find out that one of the reasons these things even become possible is because some people are desperate to have children... But it HAS to be "THEIR OWN" children, and they will go to any means to get that.

People like this are part of why these types of boundaries get pushed so far.

I can't judge or fault anyone for what they're going through. But I've encountered adoptees who greatly resented the fact that they never had a biological relative and would go to any length necessary to finally have a their own biological child.

Conversely, I have also known people who are so repulsed by the idea of adopting a child that is "not their own" that they would rather have one grown in a lab--just as long as it was "theirs."