In your opinion, what's the future of bioethics? How will

>>1203992
Maybe you're really fucking dumb, but you're asking a normative question about social behaviour: ie: a political question. Imagine which board you should go to to ask such questions?

No idea, but I was conceived by in vitro fertilisation (infertile father, blonde hair, blue eyes anglo donor sperm).

:^)

IVF is already accepted.
Cloning whole humans is useless, won't happen.
Designer babies will. China will go ahead with it, and America and Europe will have to follow some time later.

>>1204000
Bioethics is philosophy.

>>1204077
Then ask a question regarding contemporary bioethics that is appropriately philosophical, not a political piece of shit.

>>1204072
Ugh... cloning can be useful. Let's say some people decide to create a clone out of a healthy human being, and have money to do that. Why not do it, as long as they treat the clone as any other human being?
And yes, human cloning is risky for now, and the technology is new. But how will we be able to make the technology risk-free if we make no attempts at cloning humans?

Child birth could be said to be useless too. And I bet plenty of people would love to have a clone if the technology was made affordable.

>>1204096
samefag,
And this is exactly the kind of ethical dilemmas I'm talking about. The opposition to cloning seems to come largely from religious groups and those who are too engulfed by dystopian science fiction.
If the clones are treated with dignity, just as human beings, and with the same human and legal rights, there would be nothing dystopian.