I saw your post it the thread. I do understand your side with science trying to benefit others- but there are times when money and natural curiosity is an element in researching. Our modern science doesn't purposely disrupt nature- but it clearly has through the recent 200 years. This time period has advanced greatly technology-wise. Diseases are discovered, researched, cured, people live healthier lives- but the steps we are taking, will they really lead us to perfection? And if they do, then what.
The way we have been living, naturally born, pretty naturally lived, and naturally died, what reason besides curiosity do we have to create clones of people.
There's the whole immortality angle. Scientists don't do science "just because". Everything is a stepping stone in figuring out something else or making a new drug or "tool".
Miscarriages and premature children are what make regularually born children fortunate to be alive.
I would not lump premature babies in with dead babies. For one, you imply the generalization that all premature babies are retarded. Two, you imply the generalization that all retarded children are a waste of breath.
There is not meant to be perfection in this world, if there was perfection in cloning and birth, what would be the miracle of life?
You assume that just because something is natural that it is better. This is not the case. If you could eliminate birth defects, wouldn't you want to try?
the fact that we are born from the womb of our mother and live in a world where we try to understand life around us.
What does our personality have to do with how we are born?
Science has done greatness with expanding the life-time of people, but it shouldn't be just for science to unbalence nature.
Once again, you assume that science does science just for kicks. You also make the horrible assumption that science is somehow at war with anything natural.
