Assuming it was affordable to the Reg'lar Folks...
A subject under discussion in another forum I participate in...what's the thoughts in this one?
A subject under discussion in another forum I participate in...what's the thoughts in this one?
Would you clone a beloved pet?
- Thread starter Terry Allan Hall
- Start date
- Status
I wouldn't. I think that would be offensive to the memory of the original pet, and I couldn't guarantee a similar personality. Pets are beloved because of shared experiences, memories and bond, not because of their (pardon the use of the word) shell.
No, I think it would just make my miss the old pet, and be constantly disappointed when it didn't act exactly right, there are something you can't clone - for example my dog has minor brain damage, naturally that has affected her personality a fair bit, and there is no way it could be replicated (and I love the daft old thing!)
As much as I would give anything to have my best friend back. No I would not clone. I also don't think the cloning could duplicate the personality. She new me like no other. I couldn't handle the body being there and nothing else that made her, her.
No No and No 
I'd no more clone a beloved pet than I would a beloved relative. Sorry as I'd be that they had passed away.
My pet is my pet, not an object for replacing like with like.
My pet is my pet, not an object for replacing like with like.
Makes me think of Church in Pet Semetary. Only creepy things could happen.
I had a Jack Russel that I would clone in a minute. Best dog I've ever had.
I would not.
no....
As much as my heart might wish for it, no I would not. It would be unfair to the clone, because I would expect them to BE the other animal, not themselves. Then I also think it would be disrespectful to the animal I had lost. That animal was special and had it's special place in my memories and my heart. It's their space, not a place to be shared with a mirror image.
I also wonder if I would some how hold less value in those few days we are given to be with these special animals, if we knew we could just have an endless amount of time. To me, the knowledge that there will not always be a tomorrow with them, causes me to hold them a bit closer, to take time for that moment of play they want when really I have other things to do, all those little things that if not done, once the time is gone you regret the missed opportunities of sharing with them.
Another thing is, if you kept having the "same" basic animal over and over, then your not allowing yourself new chances to explore other animals. To share new magic, new visions, new work, new moments with them. Would you become more static or even bored with the original animal? Would you eventually lose some of those deep feelings you had for them?
Sadly part of life is learning to let go and move on, keeping just those memories close to your heart.
I also wonder if I would some how hold less value in those few days we are given to be with these special animals, if we knew we could just have an endless amount of time. To me, the knowledge that there will not always be a tomorrow with them, causes me to hold them a bit closer, to take time for that moment of play they want when really I have other things to do, all those little things that if not done, once the time is gone you regret the missed opportunities of sharing with them.
Another thing is, if you kept having the "same" basic animal over and over, then your not allowing yourself new chances to explore other animals. To share new magic, new visions, new work, new moments with them. Would you become more static or even bored with the original animal? Would you eventually lose some of those deep feelings you had for them?
Sadly part of life is learning to let go and move on, keeping just those memories close to your heart.
Absolutely...
Nope. Breeding yes, cloning no. Beyond the cost and effort involved, cloning does pose genetic problems that breeding does not.
A cloned animal, for one thing, will not have the genetic shuffling that a true offspring would have. In other words, when a male and female mate, their offspring has a new genome that may confer some advantages, such as hybrid vigor or a new phenotype. However, what if the shuffling is disadvantageous, or what if the parent already has an optimal genome? Should we clone then? I would still argue "no," because cloned animals are "born old." Unlike in reproduction, in which babies are born with a fresh complement of DNA, cloned animals may inherit DNA that has already undergone aging. Although normal in adults, a baby born with aged DNA may prematurely develop geriatric diseases and die young.
Finally, people must remember that a clone is not the same individual as the one who donated the DNA. Genetically speaking, it's more like an identical twin. When a beloved pet has died, it's gone and we must accept that loss. Cloning won't bring him or her back. It will only create an individual with the same genes. But that individual will still develop on its own, and will still develop its own characteristics, which may be different from those of the genetic donor to one degree or another. Identical twins are not really identical, and neither would a donor and its clone be.
The cloning of animals and people should stay in the realm of science fiction, that's what I say.
^^Well said.
A cloned animal, for one thing, will not have the genetic shuffling that a true offspring would have. In other words, when a male and female mate, their offspring has a new genome that may confer some advantages, such as hybrid vigor or a new phenotype. However, what if the shuffling is disadvantageous, or what if the parent already has an optimal genome? Should we clone then? I would still argue "no," because cloned animals are "born old." Unlike in reproduction, in which babies are born with a fresh complement of DNA, cloned animals may inherit DNA that has already undergone aging. Although normal in adults, a baby born with aged DNA may prematurely develop geriatric diseases and die young.
Finally, people must remember that a clone is not the same individual as the one who donated the DNA. Genetically speaking, it's more like an identical twin. When a beloved pet has died, it's gone and we must accept that loss. Cloning won't bring him or her back. It will only create an individual with the same genes. But that individual will still develop on its own, and will still develop its own characteristics, which may be different from those of the genetic donor to one degree or another. Identical twins are not really identical, and neither would a donor and its clone be.
The cloning of animals and people should stay in the realm of science fiction, that's what I say.
Jacqui said:
^^Well said.
Nope.. but get one of same bloodlines if possible or looks similar.. yes..
ive done both of that..
ive done both of that..
No, I would never clone my pet. I have a mixed breed dog turning 11 this year. She has been my best friend since she was two months old. I love her with all my heart and can't imagine life without her. But I would never clone her. Just like people, every animal is unique and to be appreciated for who they are. I would adopt another pet and love that pet for who he/she is. Maybe in a different way, but I would still care for and love him/her.
Another extremely important point that no one has mentioned. There are thousands of dogs and cats dying in shelters everyday for lack of enough homes. IMO, it is not right to clone one of my pets when there are pets in shelters needing homes. Lets love the animals that are already on this earth. Not clone the ones that are here. Seriously, spend some time in a shelter. Look into their eyes. They need homes and they need love.
Another extremely important point that no one has mentioned. There are thousands of dogs and cats dying in shelters everyday for lack of enough homes. IMO, it is not right to clone one of my pets when there are pets in shelters needing homes. Lets love the animals that are already on this earth. Not clone the ones that are here. Seriously, spend some time in a shelter. Look into their eyes. They need homes and they need love.
lisa127 said:
^^I completely agree with this (the same may be said for breeding pure-blooded lines as well, btw).
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2012
- Messages
- 114
With so many animals in need of homes (my area has a lot of stray cats and dogs roaming around, and lots in shelters), it seems immoral and selfish to go to so much trouble to create another animal.
- Status
Similar threads
