|
Day of the Outlaw (1959)
IMDB rating: 7.20
Plot: Cowboys and ranchers have to put their differences aside when a gang of outlaws, led by army captain Jack Bruhn, decide to spend the night in a little Western town.
|
Directors: De Toth Andre
Actors: Ryan Robert,Ives Burl,Marshal Alan,Nelson David,Persoff Nehemiah,Lambert Jack,DeKova Frank,Fuller Lance,Cook Jr. Elisha,Greer Dabbs,Elson Donald,Western,
About life created in the laboratory?
I think it is probable that science will eventually, in the long term, create life in a test tube. Obviously there are significant ethical issues. Even if moral & ethical standards of the day outlawed it I could forsee that there would be clandestine success in producing such beings.
In particular, how do you think that the church at large would grapple with the issue, for instance would a being so synthesized have a soul or would they be anathematized by the wider church?
Perhaps this would be a good subject to author a book. Maybe largely science fiction now but what about the future?
To clarify my question I am referring to abiogenesis (not cloning) such that amino acids, often called "the building blocks of life", can form via natural chemical reactions (unrelated to life) and evolve from there .
The church in regards to science doesn’t have that much of a say as it used to. We can threaten excommunication and thats pretty much it. What would affect science in regards to ethics would be politicians and how they view the science. If they do find that there is large ethical conflict with their own beliefs then they will try to pass bills and laws banning research in that field OR cut funding all together.
Fear the Government instead of the Church
Michael is tired but still Ninga | Nov 15, 2009
Harvard estimates the key to abiogenesis will be found within 20 years. Many of the pieces of the puzzle have already been found. We can create some life in the lab from chemicals but it doesn’t sustain for long. And it’s certainly not complex.
Creating simple cells from chemicals is something we want to be able to do, to prove it can be done, but we’re not likely to go to far with that. We can already splice genes into existing cells to get useful organisms.
A different form of life would be more in the line of Terminator-style cyborgs (hopefully not evil ones). They will mostly be machines. No one is likely to think they have souls, but the question will be: Do they deserve legal rights?
EddieJ | Nov 15, 2009
Actually, scientists have failed to create life.
Christian Soldier of God | Nov 15, 2009
You can think whatever you want, but I believe this topic will never escape the realm of science fiction. I’m not saying it won’t be an exciting read, but that’s where it will stay.
I know where my towel is | Nov 15, 2009
Actually, I think a good number of religions — and a whole lot of people on the fringes — will be thrilled. Think about it: a whole new race of people to discriminate against.
Reileah 2.0 | Nov 15, 2009
Until it happens, I wouldn’t worry about it. I don’t worry about the highly improbable. By "life," do you mean stewing some hydrocarbons and nitrogonous compounds in some mixture and then spontaneously getting some kind of amino acid combinations these scientist will say "Eureka! We have created life!" when in fact, they just randomly generated a bunch of precursor molecules?
Or, do you imply they will engineer life, putting the molecules in a closed reactor, adjusting some conditions until they get what they want, and then say "Eureka!…." Even if they just get strands of amino acids, then they would have proven intelligent design.
Now, if they throw a bunch of basic molecules into a chamber, control the conditions and out pops a single-celled organism, or even a virus – heck, I would even settle with a proto-virus, then THAT would be something interesting, but still a designed experiment.
Single-celled life does not have a soul, a soul is identity and emotion, among other things. The question I always pose is, would a cloned human have a spirit, since a spirit is given to a human when they are conceived, and a clone, essentially, was grown. A cloned human would have a soul, but I doubt it would have a spirit. A human motivated purely by emotion, with no morality apart from what it was conditioned for.
Oh- Which "church" are you referring to? The Catholic church? Protestants? Or, Christianity in general? If in general, then you will get all sorts of different viewpoints, some correct, some incorrect. We are human, after all, and not God.
BTW – in 1985 I went to a Nobel Conference concerning genetic engineering at Gustavus Adolfus College in MN. One interesting statement one of the speakers made (I do not remember which one) was this – "It is all right and even honorable to play God. Even a child will imitate their parents, it is a form of honor and respect. However, one should not try to BE God."
AntiApollyon | Nov 15, 2009
As a Christian I know that the world will do as the world pleases and there is a cloned baby somewhere in this world, Rome probably. The danger is man created w/o a soul can be used by demons and knowing the attitude of humans cloned people will be end up being exploited and being made a**holes will kill them just for fun cause their clones. Not to be able to see fact that they will be exploited is not to be able to see past the tip of ones nose.
Don | Nov 15, 2009
I think that most major belief systems have progressed beyond the Dark Ages and will welcome these new souls, although some individual members may hold contempt. This would make interesting science fiction though.
Chris | Nov 15, 2009
