If you were to kill an exactly identical clone, should you be punished for murder(Yes) or suicide(No).

Asked by: Axons
  • The definition of a chlone.

    Firstly it is important to know what a clone is. From a biological view identical twins can also be considered clones. Is killing your identical twin suicide? Of course not. The same is with the case of killing your clone, that was created in the lab. Though a clone will be genetically identical to you, it will grow up in a different enviroment and encounter different situations than you, which gives the clone a different personality. Killing another human is murder.
    Also in that sense. Your child is 50% of your genes. Is killing your child in that case 50% suicide?

  • According to the law, killing a human being, is a crime.

    Killing someone that is different from you is murder. A clone is a kind you but it's not you. Regardless of sharing the same genetic material, it is still immoral and inhuman because you're killing someone that is NOT you. It can be different from you and it may see you as someone different just like you see it as different, paradoxically to say. Therefore, killing your clone is a crime.

  • It is human

    I believe that killing a clone of yourself is homicide due to the fact that the clone is in fact still a living breathing human being with free will. That clone will be able to function a its own being and what's to stop it from going and changing its name or doing plastic surgery? It will still be human even if it is considered to be an identical copy of you.

  • Its different than suicide

    A clone is an exact copy of yourself, but not you, if you kill the copy of yourself it is murder not suicide, suicide is killing yourself, murder is killing a different body than yourself, so therefore it is murder, not suicide, you can not kill a copy and call it suicide

  • Christian view of cloning

    First, DNA is removed from the nucleus of a creature’s cell. The material, bearing coded genetic information, is then placed in the nucleus of an embryonic cell. The cell receiving the new genetic information would have had its own DNA removed in order to accept the new DNA. If the cell accepts the new DNA, a duplicate embryo is formed. Though it is a duplicate it is a still a separate human being, a duplicate, yes but a human.Urther, Isaiah 49:1-5 speaks of God calling Isaiah to his ministry as a prophet while he was still in his mother’s womb. Also, John the Baptist was filled with the Holy Ghost while he was still in the womb (Luke 1:15). All of this points to the Bible’s stand on life beginning at conception in the womb.It seems, though, that if a human being were successfully cloned, the clone would be just as much of a human being, including having an eternal soul, as any other human being. And because of this, he/she would have to be accountable to God and God's Son Jesus Christ as any other human.
    Read more at:

  • You Are Not Your Clone

    Your clone is an exact replica of you and would therefore be exactly the same as you.

    However, you could not be charged for suicide because a single person is just that, a single person. It would be you, but it would not be you. It would be the same thing as you, no different, but it is not sharing thoughts with you, although they are the same.

  • A clone of me is not me.

    First of all, it is very important to make the distinction between my clone and me. The simple fact that the clone exists independently of me, and has thoughts without any input from me (and vice versa) shows beyond any doubt that it absolutely could not possibly be 'me', nor I them.
    Secondly, if we *are* going to consider genetically identical clones 'the same' for all meaningful intents and purposes, then we would have to treat identical twins the same as well. One of them killing the other could not legally be murder, because they have the same DNA. Never mind how ridiculous that is, the fact that we don't already do this with identical twins proves that the law could not possibly support the alternative argument.

  • "Clones" already happen in nature-identical twins

    The argument for claiming that this is suicide is based on the fact that clones have the same DNA as you. What that ignores is the fact that identical twins also share the same DNA, but we don't allow them to kill eachother without punishment. Also, the clone acts as a separate entity, is a separate entity, and thus should be treated like a separate entity.

  • I don't care.

    I believe that clones aren't people just tools because I think that clones can be genetically engineered to not have a conscious. So, in turn, I believe that you should be punished for suicide for killing a clone. Also, I believe that the Holocaust was a bad time due to real people, not clones, were murdered for what they believed in.

  • In the eyes of the current law....

    In the eyes of the current law, if you kill yourself you are committing suicide, so if a clone is identical to you in every way genetically possible, then you are killing yourself. Of course this is only in the eyes of the law, but the question is about whether it would be murder or suicide in the eyes of the law.

  • Your clone is not a real person.

    Your clone isn't a real person because they have no birth certificate because they were never born, they were grown. Therefore you can kill you clone with minimum consequences. It is closer to killing an animal than a human. So therefore if you kill you clone it is not murder, and because it's an exact copy of yourself you are killing yourself, so in conclusion it is suicide.

  • No, you're separate people

    Technically, Monozygotic (identical) twins are clones. You can be imprisoned for murdering your twin regardless of the fact you share the same genes as you are separate people, therefore killing your clone isn't committing suicide. I don't no why you can up with the idea that in the eyes of the law, you can't murder a clone.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
BblackkBbirdd says2014-06-07T13:34:53.980
Why did it post mine twice? It was supposed to go in yes.