Ethical Question: Cloning Neanderthal

Pocahontas said:
He did let the Confederacy secede (well, mostly it was Buchanan). Then they attacked America.
Click to expand...

The point being that South Carolina and the other CSA states used the democratic process to remove themselves from the union. In terms of democracy it was no longer federal territory.
 
Taft2016 said:
The point being that South Carolina and the other CSA states used the democratic process to remove themselves from the union. In terms of democracy it was no longer federal territory.
Click to expand...

I have read a lot of constitutional arguments as to why secession is illegitimate. Personally, I have no problem with it, and any state un-American enough to proceed with it isn't really worth my while. My problem with southern secession is that it was unnecessary. The American states were perfectly willing to guarantee the legality of slavery within the south in exchange for union. The south seceded anyway, which was idiotic, and provided the only possible conditions within which their sacred institution could have been abolished within five years. It's the sort of cause I wouldn't want to risk my soul dying for.
 
Dick from the Internet said:
This is BS based on your ignorance. The Confederate constitution would have made it very difficult to end slavery. The Confederates had designs on the Caribbean and fully intended to expand slavery. They were morally committed to slavery as a way of life. There is no reason to believe they would have soon given it up.
Click to expand...
Oh do shut the fuck up, the realities of trading with Europe would have concentrated their minds wonderfully.

Sent from Lenovo K5 Note:
To piss off snowflakes, bottom feeders and racists
 
There is much to suggest that the Neanderthals were in some ways superior to us - they certainly had bigger brains. And there seems no doubt whatever that they form a (relatively small) part of our ancestry.
 
Milagro said:
Oh do shut the fuck up, the realities of trading with Europe would have concentrated their minds wonderfully.
Click to expand...


WTF with the non response responses? Do you care to expand?

I am citing facts based on their statements and you are citing your own speculation and alternate history.
 
iolo said:
There is much to suggest that the Neanderthals were in some ways superior to us - they certainly had bigger brains. And there seems no doubt whatever that they form a (relatively small) part of our ancestry.
Click to expand...
The Neanderthals are now all living in Wales, the Valleys are full of them

Sent from Lenovo K5 Note:
To piss off snowflakes, bottom feeders and racists
 
Dick from the Internet said:
WTF with the non response responses? Do you care to expand?

I am citing facts based on their statements and you are citing your own speculation and alternate history.
Click to expand...
I am saying that the reality of trading with Britain meant that they would have had to give up slavery. Read up about William Wilberforce ffs.

Sent from Lenovo K5 Note:
To piss off snowflakes, bottom feeders and racists
 
Milagro said:
I am saying that the reality of trading with Britain meant that they would have had to give up slavery. Read up about William Wilberforce ffs.
Click to expand...

You are speculating.


William Wilberforce (24 August 1759 – 29 July 1833). So you think this guy would have ended slavery in the south? Does it involve some more alternate history?

I already noted British influence on the Confederate's but there is no sign or reason to believe that would have lead to the end of slavery.

You are full of shit and obviously promoting a British-centric view of history. Britain cared more about their own political and economic interests than they did about ending slavery.
 
Taft2016 said:
Developing evidence suggests that Neanderthal was a separate and distinct species from modern man.

Developing technology suggests it may someday be possible to clone a Neanderthal from recovered DNA.

Even though human surrogates would be used for the cloning process, would the ethics of human cloning come into play?

Or because they are a separate species, would it simply be a matter of the ethics of cloning extinct species, such as the woolly mammoth?

Once cloned, would it be ethical to use Neanderthals as a workforce for modern man, much as we used other livestock for labor?

They would be pretty handy to have around. Higher intelligence than other livestock, and probably a capacity to even understand our languages, perhaps even communicate intelligently.

Opinions?
Click to expand...

Zappasguitar needs a girlfriend, so yeah, do it.
 
Dick from the Internet said:
You are speculating.


William Wilberforce (24 August 1759 – 29 July 1833). So you think this guy would have ended slavery in the south? Does it involve some more alternate history?

I already noted British influence on the Confederate's but there is no sign or reason to believe that would have lead to the end of slavery.

You are full of shit and obviously promoting a British-centric view of history. Britain cared more about their own political and economic interests than they did about ending slavery.
Click to expand...

I know of no country that doesn't care for its own interests, but anti-slavery was hugely strong here, and was the main reason why the Parliament didn't support the South. We paid vast sums to such people as Cameron's ancestors to compensate them for freeing their colonial slaves, trades unionists voted against their own interest to oppose the slaving scum , and many (including many of my wife's family, went over to fight the scumbags. Stop playing games and read some history.
 
iolo said:
I know of no country that doesn't care for its own interests, but anti-slavery was hugely strong here, and was the main reason why the Parliament didn't support the South. We paid vast sums to such people as Cameron's ancestors to compensate them for freeing their colonial slaves, trades unionists voted against their own interest to oppose the slaving scum , and many (including many of my wife's family, went over to fight the scumbags. Stop playing games and read some history.
Click to expand...


Of course, they should care for their own interests. But ending slavery was not the main interest.

Why didn't they support the union? Britain's dependence on cotton was the reason they did not support the union and did consider intervention in favor of the South.

I am sure there was sincere support for ending slavery among the British people. But it is pure speculation to assume that that would have ended slavery in short order.
 
CFM said:
Border State? Maryland was a slave-owning UNION State.

What protects the Democrat party "slave holders" today? That's right. Those that belong to it choose to be slaves on that plantation.
Click to expand...

Oops, there it is. The sign of an illiterate. On the list.

Be careful on the short bus today.
 
domer76 said:
Yep. Losing.

Looking forward to driving the kiddies on the short bus this morning?
Click to expand...

I'm looking forward to driving something into your wife tonight.

Glad to see you finally acknowledge you see that your pattern is one of losing. You lost your bitch to me.
 
domer76 said:
Oops, there it is. The sign of an illiterate. On the list.

Be careful on the short bus today.
Click to expand...

The only list I'm on pertaining to you is the one of those sticking it to your wife. I'm the only one on it. You aren't even on it.

Be careful next time you kiss her. You might taste the cum she guzzled today.
 
Chlorate said:
I'd like to have seen you serve as a militia captain during the Blackhawk Wars.



Yes, Obama was weak. So are retards who ask for special treatment of the CSA.
Click to expand...

Since you don't know where I've served, you sound like just another dumbass running his dick sucker.

No one asked for special treatment.
 
Chlorate said:
I have read a lot of constitutional arguments as to why secession is illegitimate. Personally, I have no problem with it, and any state un-American enough to proceed with it isn't really worth my while. My problem with southern secession is that it was unnecessary. The American states were perfectly willing to guarantee the legality of slavery within the south in exchange for union. The south seceded anyway, which was idiotic, and provided the only possible conditions within which their sacred institution could have been abolished within five years. It's the sort of cause I wouldn't want to risk my soul dying for.
Click to expand...

It's not un-American to stand up for the Constitution that the union states abused. Like Thomas Jefferson said 85 years before the southern states seceded, there comes a time when the political bands between groups have to be broken. Just like those that figured out England's abuse of power wasn't going to change, those in the South figured it out.

You don't sound like you'd fight for any cause.
 
Milagro said:
Oh do shut the fuck up, the realities of trading with Europe would have concentrated their minds wonderfully.

Sent from Lenovo K5 Note:
To piss off snowflakes, bottom feeders and racists
Click to expand...

Literally no historian agrees with you on the matter.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top