Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Mad Kally · 12-31-2002, 06:47 PM

Quote:

posted by WWSD:
Now, correct me if I'm wrong but, aren't parthenosoulic species striclty confined to the soulmenoptherans?

That's right. Also some species of lizardosis soulopithecus.

WWSD · 12-31-2002, 06:52 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mad Kally
That's right. Also some species of lizardosis soulopithecus.

Oh oh that's right, I'd forgotten about them.

And that just reminded me of the parthenosoulic species of fruit fly, Drosophila soulatorum.

When the genomic sequences of these species comes in, we'll be able to construct soul phylogenies!

My soul didn't not evolve from no monkey soul damnit!!

Mad Kally · 12-31-2002, 07:14 PM

Like I keep trying to tell these people, I didn't come from no damn monkey either! Why are there still monkeys? huh? huh?

12-31-2002, 09:43 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Grizzly
Makes sense to me (except for the butterfly comment).

In order for I to have a soul, I have to exist independently from the soul. Then the soul is not me (our consciousness). If we do become one with our soul, then the word soul becomes redundant (I will suffice).

See how easy that is?

Grizzly

PS please do not try this at home.

But the butterfly comment makes it so obvious. Anyway, Grizzly, it's easy, but easier said than done.

Have a good one.

Infinity Lover · 01-01-2003, 02:39 AM

Soul... no soul...

I just want to know if clones are gonna be funky.

Perchance · 01-01-2003, 07:02 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by sakrilege:
But why 'punish' the clone? Though this does fit the god that punishes us for Adam & Eve's actions.

To be honest, I haven't seen that point raised in any of the "it's unnatural" objections I've heard. People are more focused on the consequences in the here and now- would there be more clones than humans, would humans be less than clones, would clones have souls. And when they start harnessing the vague fear of technology going too fast that some people seem to have into it, then it transmutes into an exclusively human-focused agenda.

My guess would be that it fits in with God's modus operandi, though. Giving the clones no souls is not really a punishment for the clones, but for the humans.

Quote:

Well there are just a few other species out there alive and surviving without souls. And if this is the argument then the clones already produced are indeed a problem!

Here I think the old distinction between humans and animals comes in (although not always, as Amos has pointed out). Humans should have souls; animals don't have to. Most commentaries I've heard on the subject talk about human clones, and see animal clones as a problem primarily because they're opening the road to human cloning, and proving that cloning can happen at all.

-Perchance.

sakrilege · 01-01-2003, 10:54 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by wildernesse
I saw something about this on Christian Forums the other day where someone said that a clone would be more able to be influenced by Satan--but he didn't say why, I don't think.

This is what disturbs me, it gives them a reason to discriminate. Someone more prone to Satan's influence would not be allowed to teach school or whatever. We already have fights over "sexual preferences" so now we can add Conception Methodology?

Quote:

Originally posted by Perchance
My guess would be that it fits in with God's modus operandi, though. Giving the clones no souls is not really a punishment for the clones, but for the humans.

I hadn't thought of it this way. As I mentioned above my impression is it is a way to discriminate against clones.

Oresta · 01-01-2003, 11:55 AM

WWSD:
My soul didn't not evolve from no monkey soul damnit!!

Sir, that should read: "My soul didn't not never evolve from no monkey soul damnit!!"

-the Grammar Police, Multi-Negative Division

Philosoft · 01-01-2003, 01:06 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Infinity Lover
Soul... no soul...

I just want to know if clones are gonna be funky.

Agreed. We should petition to have only clones of George Clinton.

Perchance · 01-02-2003, 06:49 AM

Hi sakrilege,

I do think this is a way to discriminate against clones. I just don't think that religious discrimination on the basis of "god won't like it" is restricted to clones. After all, various accusations of "unnatural" have been used against homosexuals and powerful women as well.

What is unusual, I think, is that human clones don't exist yet, so this is a kind of preemptive strike.

-Perchance.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

12-31-2002, 07:14 PM	#23
Mad Kally Banned Join Date: May 2001 Location: LALA Land in California Posts: 3,764	Like I keep trying to tell these people, I didn't come from no damn monkey either! Why are there still monkeys? huh? huh?

01-01-2003, 02:39 AM	#25
Infinity Lover Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: The Netherlands Posts: 1,047	Soul... no soul... I just want to know if clones are gonna be funky.

01-01-2003, 11:55 AM	#28
Oresta Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2000 Location: Detroit, MI Posts: 1,107	WWSD: My soul didn't not evolve from no monkey soul damnit!! Sir, that should read: "My soul didn't not never evolve from no monkey soul damnit!!" -the Grammar Police, Multi-Negative Division

01-02-2003, 06:49 AM	#30
Perchance Veteran Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: Kentucky Posts: 1,059	Hi sakrilege, I do think this is a way to discriminate against clones. I just don't think that religious discrimination on the basis of "god won't like it" is restricted to clones. After all, various accusations of "unnatural" have been used against homosexuals and powerful women as well. What is unusual, I think, is that human clones don't exist yet, so this is a kind of preemptive strike. -Perchance.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.