Of the few things that tend to get in the way of scientific progress, especially when someone begins tapping into the new frontiers are politics and religion. Though some of these views have a place in society and scientific practices, there are points in time where these views tend to get far too involved and make too much of a big concern for something that tends to be either miniscule or minute.
The same can be said with cloning.
This is the biggest subject where religion tends becomes too meddlesome. While I think cloning is fine with both animals and humans, there is overarching problem of scientific hysteria that religious groups generate because they feel science tries to equal itself or comes off greater than God. Personally, I disagree on the overall concept; scientific progress keeps advancing and needs some rules should be updated with clarifications and further restraints. For most Christians, my idea sounds like compromise, and frankly I would not blame them. Out of scientific history, many Christians (past and present) often lost out on compromises from new ‘challenging’ scientific theories like evolution and heliocentric solar system.
While of course I am not trying to encourage people to embrace these views without considering the implications from these challenging discoveries, I am encouraging believers from every church to continually develop and place further perimeters and clarifications upon the scientific theories. For instance, the perimeters upon evolution and its findings should be placed upon the philosophical axioms used to interpret the alleged discoveries. Despite that I am a 6-day creationist, I think when the development of evolution came about, the church should have realigned itself to engage the field of science, and offer alternatives to the theoretical belief system.
The same should be said when it comes to cloning. Science can only replicate life, not resurrect it. No one is ever going to come back to life until the last judgment arrives. The other aspect of science needs to adhere to the sanctity of life altogether, not ignore part of that rule to keep other lives. Usually, those who ‘murder’ to preserve do not preserve anything, but only kill.
With that being said, let me begin with what I consider OK to do. I see no reason to prohibit the practice of replicating a deceased person as long as the public understands what the package does not include: a fully replicated person with the ‘same soul.’ The behaviors, thoughts, and ideals can be in fact similar, but the person probably will make differentiating choices depending on his or her environment and situations these ‘clones’ live in. Unfortunately, too many of us think that the clones from Star Wars eventually think all too similarly when Darth Vader decides to take over the galaxy.
I think it’s also more proper to develop and engineer the creation of an egg cell embryo without carrying its DNA. In that sense, cloning is possible for anyone to use without destroying life or altering what was originally intended by the creator. This is the new frontier that I expect to find someday see well-developed into the future.