Until we agree on a Universal definition of what a soul is, then your question will remain unanswerable. Different religion and Philosophies have different idea (and only an idea, no proof) of what a soul is. *see related link; "Wikipedia: Soul" on left.. If there is such a thing as a soul I'd assume yes. Identical twins form when one egg naturally clones to create another. Nobody ever debates where one of the identical twins doesn't have a soul. If a human was cloned artificially the clone would start out as a baby just like anybody else, just with exactly identical DNA to its parent.
No humans have been cloned yet. Should a human ever be cloned, then presumably, the clone would be identical (genetically) to the original from which it is copied; thus, it would be a human.
It is really expensive to clone a human. It can cost anywhere from $1.7 million to $2.0 million. Cloning is not available to the public as of now. Wait a few years and you never know.
The UN plays a key role in promoting and protecting human rights globally through various mechanisms such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Human Rights Council, and specialized agencies like UNICEF and UNHCR. It monitors human rights violations, provides assistance to countries in implementing human rights standards, and raises awareness about human rights issues.
A clone believes it IS the real thing. Once cloned anyone other than you will be unable to tell the difference and you will not be able to prove you are the orginal. DNA tests will not work as you will be identical in all respects. The only way a clone would not be identical is if your memories are not cloned also. This is dependent on the technology you use. My advice is, don't clone yourself.
around 7 to 8 hours. (source-my father is a doctor.)
No. But I'd like to see you try.
It's mostly to do with ethics and laws. Imagine if you were to clone yourself. Would the clone have rights? Would it be a citizen? What if you killed it, or it killed you?
I'm fairly certain human cloning is illegal in most places, but considering there was a clone of you, they would be a human being and as such killing them would be murder.
No, becuasse when you clone a human then they have no feelings and the clone will get beat up and probably die. SO, therefore, cloning a human would be totally... useless. Cloning is dangourus because it enharets the same genetic mutation as the person before it, therefor meaning if a person got arthuridus at 15 the clone would have it when it was born. if they cloned a 30 year old woman and she had kidney problems and acholhal problems, when her clone is born it would need achohol to survive, and it would have kidney problems.
In Australia, it is illegal to clone a human being. It is also illegal to clone a human being in the United States.
I would clone myself
No humans have been cloned yet. Should a human ever be cloned, then presumably, the clone would be identical (genetically) to the original from which it is copied; thus, it would be a human.
Cloning humans raises ethical concerns, as it may infringe on individual rights, lead to devaluation of human life, and pose risks to the health and well-being of the cloned individuals. Additionally, there are unresolved safety and technical issues surrounding human cloning that could have unknown consequences.
There have been many attempts to clone a human being but all have failed. No, there has not been a human clone created till this day.
I would clone myself
Contributions have been made in the field of human rights by the UN, an organisation which embodies the ideals of internationalism.An example of thiss would be the universal declaration of human rights.
In the broadest sense, it is a human rights violation not to treat a human being like a human being. Racism is the intentional relegation of an ethnic community to a sub-human state, and thus is not, eo ipso, a "violation" of human rights, but it *is* indicative of an attitude which would *want* to violate human rights.