Amazon.com Widgets

Artificial creation of human beings, yes or no?

Asked by: 8BitSensei
  • As a Catholic

    I still don't see anything wrong. Should not be used on a wide scale, we have plenty of real babies being made every day. Perhaps we should successfully create a few and then stick to creating livestock for food. We shouldn't go too far with creating humans, that might open a wide range of problems we can't forsee

  • I cannot find any ethical issues with this

    Using this technique (or similar) http://www.geekosystem.com/artificial-eggs-sperm-mice/ in the future to create artificial human beings (who may or may not be born from an artificial surrogate or organic) I see absolutely no ethical issues with it, all human beings are not to be discriminated against due to their birth circumstances especially wen that was there parents informed decission due to personal choice or other medical reasons. Opinions appreciated.

  • No Meaningful Difference

    Why not? It would spare women the pain and suffering of nine months of puking, cramps, and nightmares and all the glory of childbirth and the repercussions that that has on the human body. So long as the species continues, that's all that's really important in the end. A baby produced artificially would not be any different from one produced naturally.

  • Yes for scientific purposes.

    For commercial purposes... Well that would just devalue human life. This may even lead to slavery. When you are artificially created... Are you a free person with rights or are you the property of a company or person? It would be like... Need a good lawyer? Why not just custom make one with suitable genes. People would have to invest money to make a person... So they are in fact purchasing someone.

  • Means to the end.

    So long as the end result is human, there is no problem. Controlling the circumstances of conception, development, and birth can lead to the ability of improving people as a whole. We've genetically modified our food to better, every generation, for thousands of years. Why not improve people, if we can?

  • Detracting from the uniqueness of mankind and eschewing what it means to be human.

    Before I begin my case for the negative side of this 'house,' I would first like to mention a few things if I may:
    I very recently stumbled across this website and so far it looks to be really quite intuitive. With that said, this is indeed my very first debate on this website and I have no idea how a scoring system works, if indeed there is one, and also please forgive me if I breach the moral decorum of this website in any way, and rest assured it wasn't intentional, but rather a beginner's mistake as it were. I would greatly appreciate it if one of the 'veterans,' on this website would care to show me the basic gist of how debating is meant to work here.

    Now with the background info aside, I will hope right into the negative teams case with some rebuttal, before moving onto my substantive material.

    Badewanne said that :
    "We have plenty of real babies being made every day. Perhaps we should successfully create a few and then stick to creating livestock."

    There is one vital flaw in Badewanne's argument and that occurs when he says that we should succesfully create a FEW. And that, ladies and gentlemen, is where the affirmative teams main point falls under ruin. What do we define as a few? Where do we draw the line and say this is too many? With all these questions which the affirmative team have failed to answer, their arguments have no base to stand on and as such, no credibility. There will be several complications to what Badewanne is proposing. Chief, but by no means the only one, among them is the simple fact that of one parent wants a 'designer baby' what is to stop another parent from demanding one, claiming equal rights as a member of the human race. Where and how can we draw the line without losing key tenets of liberty and social equality? The answer is we either don't start or we accede to everyone's wishes on the topic. And the latter option is fraught with peril as I will now proceed to reveal in my substantive material.


    Artificial creation of human beings is a morally unjust and undermining concept. This is because it undermines a key tenet of the human race... Uniqueness.

    Every fibre of every human being currently standing on this planet as of the 13th March 2014 was crafted by a process we call, procreation. This is our natural form and one that was gifted to us by nature. Moreover, with the exception of identical twins, we are all unique. No one of us is perfect in physical appearance. This is the gift given to us by nature that we must cherish, as it gives a sense of identity and perspective. To allow artificial creation of human beings is to waste this gift and lose our own perception of identity and to have it replaced with an inhumane 'perfectionist made,' artificial attitude.

  • I see that most internet people are idiots, because they didn't read Frankenstein and Brave New World.

    Do you want to live in society where an elite group control everything?
    They play God, they abuse you, they control you and they suppress your voice. Artificial creation is just another step to achieve a total totalitarian regime, no human being should have that much power. We are inherently born evil and corrupt, we don't deserve anything.

  • As an opposition to Badewanne

    This is completely against the teachings of the Catholic Church. Catholic teaching states that procreation is limited to the conjugal act. To treat human life as an object or something we have the right to create or destroy demeans the intrinsic value and dignity of every human being. This is why the Church does not permit in-vitro fertilization.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.