Cloning And The Church

[Duncan]

Do you have a quote from him? There is nothing on the site that says this, even the cite disagrees with it:

oh man! you can't even trust the internet these days! tsk tsk tsk!

[Calm]

Other justification from BY:

In order that Cain’s posterity not gain an advantage the Lord denied them the priesthood until such time as “the class of spirits presided over by Abel should have the privilege of coming into the world.” Those spirits formerly under Cain’s leadership were reportedly aware of the implications of this decision, yet “still looked up to him, and rather than forsake him they were willing to bear his burdens and share the penalty imposed upon him.”^91....

The preexistence “hypothesis” gained wide acceptance among the Mormons, and was even included in non-Mormon accounts of Church teachings.⁹⁵ Brigham Young, however, did not feel it necessary to appeal beyond the curse on Cain to the preexistenee. When asked “if the spirits of negroes were neutral in Heaven,” he answered, “No, they were not, there were no neutral [spirits] in Heaven at the time of the rebellion, all took sides…. All spirits are pure that came from the presence of God. The posterity of Cain are black because he committed murder. He killed Abel and God set a mark upon his posterity. But the spirits are pure that enter their tabernacles….”⁹⁶

from same link

And a totally off topic observation by the author I feel is important enough to cite here to encourage people to read his work (I have read quite a bit of it in the past, I will have to set aside some time to read the whole thing, it is imo one subject we members should inform ourselves upon so we can seriously consider where we might be erring in similar ways these days as well as better understand the reactions of others in the past and present to our faith):

Notwithstanding the repeated denunciations of racism by the modern Church, the evidence for “racist” attitudes among nineteenth-century Mormon leaders is indisputable. Despite the implications of these attitudes for modern Mormonism, their significance in the nineteenth century was negligible. “Mormon” descriptions of Negro abilities and potential can as readily be obtained from the publications of their learned contemporaries. Such a book, not atypical of this era, could be found in Brigham Young’s library—Negro-Mania: Being an Examination of the Falsely Assumed Equality of the Various Races of Men.…102 Though blatantly racist by any modern standard, this work cited men of acknowledged intellect from a variety of fields—Johann Friedrich Blumenbach, Baron Cuvier, Champollion, Samuel G. Morton, Rosellini, George Gliddon, Samuel Stanhope Smith, Thomas Jefferson, to name but a few. Brigham Young could find ample support for his racial views in this collection alone, and it was by no means exhaustive. Many others could have been included. The American scientific community though divided on the question of slavery was virtually unanimous in ascribing racial inferiority to the Negroes. So also did Louis Agassiz, Count de Gobineau, statesmen of the North as well as the South, abolitionists (excepting Garrison and a few others), slaveholders, ministers, and university [p.74] presidents. In short, the “laws of nature” were interpreted in essentially the same way by most nineteenth century Americans, Mormons included.103 Possibly Brigham Young never read his copy of Negro-Mania; even today the book reveals little evidence of usage. It is nonetheless important to realize that those few enlightened individuals who anticipated the mid-twentieth century understanding of race were not generally termed “enlightened” for their racial insight a century ago.

This is not meant to minimize the prejudices of the period nor of the leaders of the Church during that time. The regrettably uniform racial attitudes of white America from colonial to modern times have been no source of pride to anyone who has studied the subject. Nor can one mistake the implicit racial judgments conveyed in many Church statements. Consider, for example, the implications of the following simile from Brigham Young: “Here are the Elders of Israel who have got the Priesthood, who have to preach the Gospel…. They will stoop to dance like nigers. I don’t mean this as debasing the nigers by any means.”104

Edited July 6, 2013 by calmoriah

[Duncan]

I am sorry for your condition, especially if it causes you much pain and inconvenience, but just because there is no cure and you have to live with it now does not mean that your syndrome will never have a cure. That same response the doctor gave you has been said about basically every single disease that we currently have a cure for.

funnily enough it happened last night and so in my very early morning jaunt I found 40 bucks!!!!!! hahahahahahahahaha! i'm rich!!!!!!! jk

[Bikeemikey]

So my CFR still stands to anyone that can point to a church leader who has taught the fencesitter/neutral in heaven concept. I am very curious about this now.

I never said officially, I specifically said unofficially. As has already been stated BRM mormon doctrine referred to the idea of less valiant.

It was a fairly prevalent doctrine... Even managed to make its way to NZ where I grew up. Some people insisted on sharing it well into the 1990's

Edited July 6, 2013 by Bikeemikey

[thesometimesaint]

So my CFR still stands to anyone that can point to a church leader who has taught the fencesitter/neutral in heaven concept. I am very curious about this now.

http://www.utlm.org/...14appendixc.gif

Edited July 6, 2013 by thesometimesaint

[CV75]

Was there anything said about those who used the process to create human life? Was the act of cloning considered moral itself regardless of the fact that the child was considered a 'full' human? After all, human beings can be conceived in immoral acts with absolute no science involved.

No--the policy under construction was to address the sealing status of children coming into the world through artificial means (IVF, artificial insemination, surrogate gestation, etc. and especially where the egg or sperm donor are not sealed to each other). As I recall, there was some language, like that about abortion, relating to counsel about prayerful consideration, discussion with priesthood leaders, obtaining competent medical expertise, and so forth. The handbooks address it, I'm sure.

I found the leadership more focused on how to minister to the children born under these methods, and the to the individuals and couples facing problems associated withese methods, than on whether the methods were "right" or "wrong." Even when it came to the stranger stuff like human-animal chimeras, the focus was more on the individual children of God than the overall ethics of the applied science.

So I would think cloning would fall into the same category. Since then, we have "The Family: A Proclamation" which only lays out the ideal means for procreation, and doesn't prohibit other means.

[CV75]

I would love to know the results and doctrinal implications of human-animal chimera!

It would be great to know if the Army of Centaurs that North Korea is working on have human spirits or not. It might make it easier to kill the invading half-man half-horse soldiers if I knew they didn't have a spirit.

From my exposure to the subject, a human is a human no matter what gets imposed upon his genetic makeup--stay tuned for the real purpose of Patriarchs! Some might say that ultimately, a fully human human (o exalted human) is a human only by covenant, but that might be another thread.

[Stone holm]

From my exposure to the subject, a human is a human no matter what gets imposed upon his genetic makeup--stay tuned for the real purpose of Patriarchs! Some might say that ultimately, a fully human human (o exalted human) is a human only by covenant, but that might be another thread.

Yeah I remember reading a sci fi novel where they thought they had found the true cross and were trying to clone Jesus. Sigh....and again what about very advanced self directed robots?

[cdowis]

I found the leadership more focused on how to minister to the children born under these methods, and the to the individuals and couples facing problems associated withese methods, than on whether the methods were "right" or "wrong." Even when it came to the stranger stuff like human-animal chimeras, the focus was more on the individual children of God than the overall ethics of the applied science.

So I would think cloning would fall into the same category. Since then, we have "The Family: A Proclamation" which only lays out the ideal means for procreation, and doesn't prohibit other means.

Thanks for the info.

Reminds me of the sealing rule -- you seal child to the parent according to the sealing line, regardless of the natural parents. The most common application is where the child is illegitimate, and the the child gets sealed to the step father, or where there is legal adoption.

I understand that the UK courts have opened up the way for three parents for a child. http://timesofindia....ow/20933082.cms

Edited July 6, 2013 by cdowis

[CV75]

Yeah I remember reading a sci fi novel where they thought they had found the true cross and were trying to clone Jesus. Sigh....and again what about very advanced self directed robots?

I'm quite positive these two matters were not being considered. But I was involved with the issues I mentioned, and the general sentiment was that God loves all His children, no matter how they are born or into what conditions.

[CV75]

Reminds me of the sealing rule -- you seal child to the parent according to the sealing line, regardless of the natural parents. The most common application is where the child is illegitimate, and the child gets sealed to the step father, or legal adoption.

Yes -- the discussion at the time was over the BIC status of the child if the egg contributor was sealed to another husband or if the sperm cntributor was sealed to another woman. If I recall correctly, the child is BIC to the egg contributor and to whomever she is sealed regardless of who donates the sperm or gestates the baby (biological or surrogate mother). Hence the prayerful consideration.

Edited July 6, 2013 by CV75

[Calm]

TSS, again " was not valiant" is not equivalent to "fence sitter" or "neutral". I am very aware of those that taught the less valiant position, that was the standard for most leaders, IMO.

CFR is not necessary, I used Duncan's reference to Orson Hyde to track down it myself and posted them above.

[Calm]

I never said officially, I specifically said unofficially. As has already been stated BRM mormon doctrine referred to the idea of less valiant.

It was a fairly prevalent doctrine... Even managed to make its way to NZ where I grew up. Some people insisted on sharing it well into the 1990's

Less valiant is not the same as neutral. BY taught the less valiant while dismissing the neutral teaching.

I am aware of its prevalence among the membership. I was wondering if it (the neutral position, not the less valiant) was at all present among the leadership. Apparently there were a few authorities who taught this, at least early on.

Considering the confusion on this thread between the two..the number of times people have given a reference that is actually for "less valiant" (including not valiant at all) for a "fence sitter" or "neutral" CFR, I can see where the persistence of this interpretation might have come from.

[Calm]

No--the policy under construction was to address the sealing status of children coming into the world through artificial means (IVF, artificial insemination, surrogate gestation, etc. and especially where the egg or sperm donor are not sealed to each other)....

So I would think cloning would fall into the same category. Since then, we have "The Family: A Proclamation" which only lays out the ideal means for procreation, and doesn't prohibit other means.

Thank you

[strappinglad]

I am reminded of the movie ' Multiplicity ' wherein several clones were made, each from the previous clone. They got progressively less intelligent and harder to handle. On another note , the recent barbarism in soccer in Brazil , makes one wonder if some people actually have souls now !!

[Kenngo1969]

oh man! you can't even trust the internet these days! tsk tsk tsk!

If we can't trust the Interwebs, what can we trust!

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

Have been hesitant to introduce this subject, but as far as I can tell, it has been ignored here. I decided not to tiptoe around this, since it may be possible to do this in a few years.

OK, assuming that full human cloning becomes possible, what are the implications for the church and the Gospel. Will this clone have a spirit and subject to all the requirements for salvation and exaltation?

The only thing I have heard (from somewhere) the idea that the Lord will provide a spirit regardless of how the body is conceived.

This did come up in a recent thread, but turned into a debate on pro-creation and gay marriage. A poster noted that one day someone would not need male and female to reproduce. Of the Church had a policy it would be opposed as they should be to cloning on humans.

[Stone holm]

This did come up in a recent thread, but turned into a debate on pro-creation and gay marriage. A poster noted that one day someone would not need male and female to reproduce. Of the Church had a policy it would be opposed as they should be to cloning on humans.

And doesn't that sound like loads of fun, spending the eternities with Petri dishes.

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

And doesn't that sound like loads of fun, spending the eternities with Petri dishes.

God has designed the method and absence science, only his way or the hi-way. Gays can speak of families, but can through science an adoption, they will never be able to pro-create...only one to be given life.

[Bikeemikey]

God has designed the method and absence science, only his way or the hi-way. Gays can speak of families, but can through science an adoption, they will never be able to pro-create...only one to be given life.

I'm really having a hard time understanding exactly what you mean by this?

[Stone holm]

I'm really having a hard time understanding exactly what you mean by this?

I think she means no heavenly baby factory for spirit children, heavenly hubbies don't use Petri dishes, and heavenly lesbians could only produce Amazonia style worlds and that doesn't sound like much fun for a straight spirit.

[CV75]

Thank you

At the time I was involved, genetic engineering was just coming into its own, with the production of human insulin from bacteria. But in their travels into countries where the science/industry had fewer ethical controls and regulations, some pretty disconcerting stuff was documented and our leaders were anticipating some of the ramifications and potential issues that could arise for members in general -- if not then, then 50 years hence.

I'm confident the same kind of doctrinal and policy analysis ocurrs today, and I'm only speculating on this, but might be part of what prompted Elder Bednar's talks a few years ago on virtual reality.

[Stone holm]

At the time I was involved, genetic engineering was just coming into its own, with the production of human insulin from bacteria. But in their travels into countries where the science/industry had fewer ethical controls and regulations, some pretty disconcerting stuff was documented and our leaders were anticipating some of the ramifications and potential issues that could arise for members in general -- if not then, then 50 years hence.

I'm confident the same kind of doctrinal and policy analysis ocurrs today, and I'm only speculating on this, but might be part of what prompted Elder Bednar's talks a few years ago on virtual reality.

On the way to Church, I was listening to NPR discuss the fact that in the UK they have authorised a procedure which may result in a child having three genetic parents as they have authorised replacing the mitochondrial DNA of certain mothers.

[Bikeemikey]

On the way to Church, I was listening to NPR discuss the fact that in the UK they have authorised a procedure which may result in a child having three genetic parents as they have authorised replacing the mitochondrial DNA of certain mothers.

That's pretty cool.

[Brian 2.0]

On the way to Church, I was listening to NPR discuss the fact that in the UK they have authorised a procedure which may result in a child having three genetic parents as they have authorised replacing the mitochondrial DNA of certain mothers.

So evenetually polygamous familes can actually have their children be the biological children of the husband and all his wives.