Home      Discussion      Topics      Dictionary      Almanac
Signup       Login
Human cloning

Human cloning

 
Human cloning: a bad idea
 
Posts  1 - 50  of  202
Human cloning discussion
 
amorze
11/10/08
There are so many objections to human cloning that I could not even begin to state them all. I must begin with my main objection. Human cloning will upset the natural balance of ecology; much like many of our medical advances. I imagine that many pro-cloning advocates are all for population control, eliminating polution, conserving our natural environment, etc. Human cloning is a trend that is running against the grain of such positions. Why?

Nature has developed certain measures by which overpopulation is prevented. It also has a natural cycle that cleans the earth of polution and recycles all organic life. Disease itself is a function of nature that is neccesary to check overcrowding and polution. How does this play into human cloning? Human cloning is not a natural form of reproduction. The same goes for artificial insemination, test tube conception, fertility drugs, etc. Human cloning upsets a balance nature has set up in order to maintain life on the planet. To clone we must copy old genetic material. We all know that if you have to many generations of copies then degeneration sets in. Same goes for DNA. If we solve that riddle then we have a new one. How do we deal with human clones that do not age genetically? Then we have eliminated mortality. Great! No, it is bad. Why? Because immortality upsets another natural boundry.

Then you have the socio-economic problem of people not dying, but new people are still being born. That leads to overpopulation, overconsumption, depletion of resources, and class struggles. Such conditions always end in conflict for resources, i.e. war. War results in masses of dead bodies, which in turn cause an increase in pathogins, which result in pandemic outbreaks(which is nature returning to a balance).
           
 
bulldog1
12/12/08
replied to: amorze
Replied To:  There are so many objections to human cloning that I could not even...
Cloning would its own pros and cons. I agree if it is used for a purpose as to treat some disease or helping infertile couples it is worthwhile. While on the other hand, there is a question of dealing with the identity crisis and people using it for unethical activities.

Thus, there should be strict regulations on the process for its beneficial use in the human society.
           
 
bonnieginter
12/13/08
replied to: bulldog1
Replied To:  Cloning would its own pros and cons. I agree if it is used for a pu...
I think the motives for undertaking cloning are generally honourable but the problem that would arise with cloning humans is the rights of the clone.

Many of the arguments so far have been based on referring to the clone as "the clone" whereas the clone does not think of him/herself as a clone but rather as the original.

Some films have been mentioned but I remember one Arnold Swartzernegger (spelling?) film (I think it was called "the 6th Day") where he was cloned without knowing it while he was unconscious.

The clone inherited all the thoughts and memories of the original Arnie and was insterted back into the family of the original Arnie. When the original Arnie found out and saw the clone with the rest of the family he wanted to kill him but stopped because he realised that the clone has no idea he was a clone. Hope I haven't lost anyone :)

I think the decision about whether it would be ethical to clone organisms/body parts etc would have to be based around the degree of self awareness.

From a religious angle, would the clone have a soul? Would the lack of this give it any more/less right to life?
           
 
tutanhamon
01/09/09
replied to: bonnieginter
Replied To:  I think the motives for undertaking cloning are generally honourabl...
hey, I thingk that the Arni movie is just a anrealistic movie, it's fiction, and no matter what someone's minds and thoughts could never be transfered to another being, so it's an interesting idea but it's too fictional. so I too am opposing cloning becasue there is the possible result of deformation, or the obstrucion of individuality, or even the belief that god created humans, and by the doctors cloning humans, they are action as Gods, and it infurates them, escpecially the Roman catholic church.

thank you
Melanya
           
 
KriketMaster
01/19/09
replied to: tutanhamon
Replied To:  hey, I thingk that the Arni movie is just a anrealistic movie, it's...
I was wondering if 'the clone,' (as it were) would even know how to walk or talk, because 'the clone' would just be a DNA replica, and walking and talking is a learned ability. So if you cloned, say, a twenty year old, would you just have a identical shell of a person without memories or abilities.
Sorry. I know that's a little off topic but it's been bothering me.
           
 
scbrow
01/20/09
replied to: KriketMaster
Replied To:  I was wondering if 'the clone,' (as it were) would even know how to...
A cloned human would begin life as an embryo and would grow to adulthood at the same rate as the person who supplied the DNA.

The clone would therefore learn to walk and talk in the same manner as a normal child.
           
 
KriketMaster
01/22/09
replied to: scbrow
Replied To:  A cloned human would begin life as an embryo and would grow to adul...
Oh, I get it. The clone would start off as a baby, not a 20 year old, right? So it could learn to walk and talk like a normal person.
           
 
3031058
02/10/09
replied to: amorze
Replied To:  There are so many objections to human cloning that I could not even...
My only problem is, I have a paper to write and no one seems to be giving any reasons WHY these things would in turn, happen.
           
 
efe122
02/01/09
replied to: KriketMaster
Replied To:  Oh, I get it. The clone would start off as a baby, not a 20 year ol...
well people say that clones could be used for organ transplants and such

but the sad fact remains that clones would be like people themselves, with feelings and personalities ( much like the original person i suppose)

so the idea of creating an organ farm out of real people seems barbarous to many
           
 
scbrow
02/02/09
replied to: efe122
Replied To:  well people say that clones could be used for organ transplants and...
Yes, "organ farms" comprised of cloned humans would be immoral and illegal. Cloned humans would have all of the legal rights granted to non clones.

It may be possible in the near future, however, to modify the genome of cloned humans to only allow certain the portions of the brain to develop - only the brain structures responsible for breathing, heart functions, and other basic functions. These clones would not be conscious and would (in theory) not be human.
           
 
asdf
02/12/09
replied to: 3031058
Replied To:  My only problem is, I have a paper to write and no one seems to be ...
That could help in your daily life so you can get more things done at once
           
 
shiregirl91
02/04/09
replied to: scbrow
Replied To:  Yes, "organ farms" comprised of cloned humans would be immoral and ...
We has humans should not be able to take the lives of our own kind, once a child is conceived now matter how many weeks, days, or minutes old they have life, to take this away for any purpose, be it to save another persons life, would in itself be a form of murder, an illegal act by the laws of nations. Just because the 'clone' would be made artificially it would still contain human DNA. They intend to make 'clones', from what has been said i would assume that the word clone would mean
'exact replica', if this is so they would have human feelings, emotions, and rights,
This discussion is in many ways as controversial as the 'abortion' debate, it all comes down to where you draw the lines of life.
We as humans have been given the gift of being able to create life, where does it say that we can take it away.
           
 
Khvalovsky
02/12/09
replied to: asdf
Replied To:  That could help in your daily life so you can get more things done ...
Any crime is done by someone or a group of persons who use something as a weapon or tool of murder. Cloning can become a new kind of biological warfare when life is taken from one participant of scientific experiment for bringing profit to another one. If the both parties are potential human beings without making accent on their origin - natural or artificial, it would be wrong to maim or kill in any case. What's the difference? The crime, such as murder remains open to public. Who's an agressor and initiator and who's a victim? One part suffers the annihilation and another is victorious. On the genetic level sertain structures have been mixed and their nature has been changed. Are you sure in natural purification and making life healthier? There're numerous hidden worlds inside us and their functions are being studied on all possible micro levels. Some tiny intelligent creatures should exist inside every alive cell and they certainly inhabit all material objects as well communicating between themselves by means of inter-cellular and sub-atomic exchange of energy. We, ourselves, are just self-ruling, unique biological civilizations along with all other forms of life big and small hosting them, those invisible aliens, like our Earth which hosts us all in its turn. Light is a vehicle for their interplanetary migration. People're able to exterminate all life on this planet outside and inside it as it's been already done and not once, maybe. The process which is shaping our future can't be frozen, it moves ahead and we're to be not passive vitnesses, bystanders - we should unite our voices, forces against any form of criminal activity that would be destructive for human beings of the present days, future. The phenomenon of cloning should be explained and clearly understood with all its white and dark sides for clearing ways of non-agressive and not harmful nature, with all its possible destructive and progressive impacts, influences, irreversible changes, shouldn't it?
           
 
DiSiLLuZioN
02/06/09
replied to: scbrow
Replied To:  Yes, "organ farms" comprised of cloned humans would be immoral and ...
Tell that to a republican!
           
 
scbrow
02/07/09
replied to: DiSiLLuZioN
Replied To:  Tell that to a republican!
We republicans are not all closed minded Christian fundamentalists. Some of us are pragmatists who view human cloning and stem cell research as sciences that can improve the quality of life for all of God's creatures.
           
 
profcraig
02/11/09
replied to: scbrow
Replied To:  A cloned human would begin life as an embryo and would grow to adul...
Only if genes and "nature" were 100% the answer to development would a clone grow into adulthood at the same rate as the person who supplied the DNA. The environment or "nurturing" of the embryo/fetus/child would be totally different than the original. It would be next to impossible to duplicate the environment of the original person in order to guarantee "normal" development. Within certain boundaries, development does indeed proceed along a "normal" course but genes are not the sole reason for our development. Unless, of course, you take a radical view of growth, that is, a maturational view or an "unfolding" of the genotype into the phenotype. The environment plays a substantial role in the outcome of every human being. So, development can be predicted within limits, but no child walks and talks at exactly the time we expect they will.
           
 
zerogee
03/29/09
replied to: amorze
Replied To:  There are so many objections to human cloning that I could not even...
Wow I guess because fire can burn you to death we should have never learned to create it right. Knowledge is the key just because it is summer and fire is not needed to keep me from freezing to death. Does this mean that I should not learn how to master it because it is not necessary to continue my survival at this time of my life. There is nothing in it self that is good or evil right or wrong. How we use our knowledge is the only question. Even the best of intentions can create the most dreadful results when attempting something not completely understood. I would rather go into the future learning as much as possible because in a time where the possibility of the extinction of all life by an ever growing list of ways natural or man made,Cloning my be the fire that man needs to ensure his survival in a very uncertain future.
zerogee
           
 
stephenking1
05/20/09
replied to: shiregirl91
Replied To:  We has humans should not be able to take the lives of our own kind,...
Like many new innovations, there are a lot of new moral challenges that have to be thought through carefully.
           
 
ulthuannl
06/30/09
replied to: stephenking1
Replied To:  Like many new innovations, there are a lot of new moral challenges ...
I think cloning is some sort of ''forced twins''
- only one part of the twins is like 30 years older or so. Clones should have the same rights as all other beings: they are humans, however you look at it.
I mean when twins are born they both have the same birth rights. Well same should apply to clones.

about the organ farm thing: it's possible to clone just one part of the body. For example the liver. You just need some liver cells from the original subject, cultivate them and they'll become a liver themselves, which can them be transplanted into the subject (if needed). They already do that with skin on people with severe burns. But I do think it would be bad to create some sort of ''personal organ bank'', so that everyone would have a ''reserve'' organ set.
           
 
Owenbomar
07/29/09
replied to: amorze
Replied To:  There are so many objections to human cloning that I could not even...
I agree 100% the moral and phisical problems ruin any benifits
           
 
Streona
08/05/09
replied to: ulthuannl
Replied To:  I think cloning is some sort of ''forced twins'' - only one part ...
There are two kinds of cloning here- therapeutic cloning whereby one's liver is propagated for possible transplantation which seems unobjectionable and the creation of a whole individual which is an entirely different question. From animal cloning it seems that the risk is that the holistic clone may have congenital weaknesses that the original subject did not have and a lesser lifespan, which would be unacceptable for humans. But what would be the point for society as a whole, as opposed to the personal vanity of rich individuals since human beings are collectively perfectly capable of reproducing by the traditional method ?
           
 
1jah2haile34
08/14/09
replied to: Owenbomar
Replied To:  I agree 100% the moral and phisical problems ruin any benifits
This whole argument is foolishness. When an individual produces male/female offspring and it looks like them, there is your natural cloning!!! Why leave the original way to try/do something unnatural??? Foolishness!!! Man CAN NOT CREATE/CLONE MAN except the ORIGINAL WAY... SEX!!!! WHO has a problem with sex??? Anyone??? And if you do have a problem with the ORIGINAL way ask yourself... HOW DID I GET HERE?!?!?!!!
           
 
Mollymariam
08/18/09
replied to: amorze
Replied To:  There are so many objections to human cloning that I could not even...
I agree with You that Human Cloning is not a natural form of reproduction.
           
 
emmanchang
08/20/09
replied to: amorze
Replied To:  There are so many objections to human cloning that I could not even...
Brethren,
I do not first of all know if these individuals will have souls since they have not undergone God's reliable process of life.
           
 
clairemaria
09/04/09
replied to: amorze
Replied To:  There are so many objections to human cloning that I could not even...
I agree that we are already overpopulated so I do not think human cloning is a good idea especially considering the fact that some countries are on child-number reduction.I am failing to get the major objective of human cloning as well as its main benefit to society.
           
 
solos90
09/13/09
replied to: amorze
Replied To:  There are so many objections to human cloning that I could not even...
Totally agree with you. Playing God is not something that we should do.
           
 
solos90
09/13/09
replied to: 1jah2haile34
Replied To:  This whole argument is foolishness. When an individual produces mal...
I agree on your point about who has a problem with sex.
I don't have a problem with sex because i know that sex got me here.
           
 
nsmkhattak
09/15/09
replied to: Streona
Replied To:  There are two kinds of cloning here- therapeutic cloning whereby on...
The production of human clone is just like interfering to GOD matters AND ALSO THE TISSUE ORGANIZATION IS NOT POSSIBLE
           
 
theres22
09/17/09
replied to: 1jah2haile34
Replied To:  This whole argument is foolishness. When an individual produces mal...
I think its more likely to be the old cosmetic versus medicine argument if youre looking to make designer babies..definately bad Idea...however if you think about the potential to restrict natures' natural problems maybe not all bad..???
           
 
theres22
09/17/09
replied to: scbrow
Replied To:  A cloned human would begin life as an embryo and would grow to adul...
This is quite a basic point..and just physiological..what if the religious and ethical society rejected it and heeded the additional problem of physcological trauma. that may be deemed as cruel..although possible.
           
 
1jah2haile34
09/17/09
replied to: theres22
Replied To:  I think its more likely to be the old cosmetic versus medicine argu...
I question: What NATURAL problems does Nature have? Any Problems that is in Nature is unnatural! Mans Intervention,poision plan, and his concrete jungles are unanatural phenomenons in Nature;and in Nature there exists the Law of cause and effect.Mans cause is the unnatural effect on Nature!!! So, there is no Natural problems in Nature! Other than that I agree with you.
           
 
1jah2haile34
09/17/09
replied to: emmanchang
Replied To:  Brethren, I do not first of all know if these individuals will ha...
Good point! just walking zombies! or Night of the Living Dead ! There is a FUNGUS, AMONG us!!!
           
 
theres22
09/17/09
replied to: bonnieginter
Replied To:  I think the motives for undertaking cloning are generally honourabl...
I agree that non clone's are more accepting, that it is the creator above the clone itself that is responsible for any inethical or religious conflict and therefore unfair to blame the clone itself. The arguament for the existence of the clone is that it was definately planned/created the same as with gods creations...so maybe then from the non clone interest in its experiential path the arguament could then switch to the interest following the clone rather than the clone itself...???
           
 
theres22
09/17/09
replied to: 1jah2haile34
Replied To:  I question: What NATURAL problems does Nature have? Any Problems th...
It has to be agreed that it is most definately the physical/mental interface...but then the envirnoment is merely a phsycological response (hence: MENTAL)of the experiential path of your own creation that you have nutured it into. Nature-Nurture!!!
           
 
theres22
09/17/09
replied to: emmanchang
Replied To:  Brethren, I do not first of all know if these individuals will ha...
There..as with all strategy. It is the tried and tested that are usually understood more thoroughly.
           
 
1jah2haile34
09/17/09
replied to: emmanchang
Replied To:  Brethren, I do not first of all know if these individuals will ha...
Good point! just walking zombies! or Night of the Living Dead ! There is a FUNGUS, AMONG us!!!
           
 
1jah2haile34
09/17/09
replied to: theres22
Replied To:  I think its more likely to be the old cosmetic versus medicine argu...
I question: What NATURAL problems does Nature have? Any Problems that is in Nature is unnatural! Mans Intervention,poision plan, and his concrete jungles are unanatural phenomenons in Nature;and in Nature there exists the Law of cause and effect.Mans cause is the unnatural effect on Nature!!! So, there is no Natural problems in Nature! Other than that I agree with you.
           
 
9898362828
09/19/09
replied to: clairemaria
Replied To:  I agree that we are already overpopulated so I do not think human c...
I don't think so that, human cloning is a bad idea,because at a certain level of it's application very important.
           
 
rad489
09/24/09
replied to: bonnieginter
Replied To:  I think the motives for undertaking cloning are generally honourabl...
We are currently debating a health care plan for the US that may include a government-run option. It has been matter-of-factly stated that health care would be rationed...in other words, some people or groups of people would not receive certain treatments because it would be too expensive. The issue would be, who decides whether a 75 year old should get a triple bypass?

In the case of a clone, we tend to think the clone is for the benefit of the original...in other words, if we need a kidney or a lung, the clone could provide it. But, in the rationing of health care, wouldn't it make sense to favor the undamaged clone over the damaged original. And where would the clone live...in a closet somewhere where we could have access to it when needed. What if the clone volunteered for some heroic work and was severely injured....would someone in power be able to rule that the original provide a vital organ for the survival of the clone?
           
 
theres22
09/24/09
replied to: asdf
Replied To:  That could help in your daily life so you can get more things done ...
I like that approach..may be you are then restricting human natures natural potential by physically being able to be in more than one place at any time..instead of pushing the limits of individual capability..partly more humane to enable a broader capability but then less challenging for those people who like to push themeselves to the upper limits...
           
 
Jenab6
10/11/09
replied to: amorze
Replied To:  There are so many objections to human cloning that I could not even...
I think that someone who alleges that there are "many" objections to a medical practice for which there is considerable support and enthusiasm is obliged to present a summary list of those "many" objections. You wouldn't go into details unless challenged to prove that what you regard as an objection is really objectionable. But you shouldn't say "many" without proving "many."

Human cloning should not be used for every human. There are some persons of whom it might be said that even one copy is too many. But there are others who are such prime examplars of human excellence that their genes ought to be given propagation opportunities an order of magnitude higher in number than usual. Cloning can provide these additional opportunities.

Eugenics is a good thing. Without some form of eugenics, a breeding stock degenerates from entropy, as genes that cause weakness, unhealthy traits, and predispose organisms toward acquired disease, proliferate down the generations. Nature practices eugenics in a crude and brutal form: yet the results are, in general, quite good. Intelligently practiced eugenics can provide the same good results without so much brutality.

I must complain again about your style of writing. You ought not say that nature has developed "certain measures" without identifying what those measures are. In this unusual instance, I can guess what you left unsaid, but you ought to break the habit of glossing over details.

Nature's measures for population control are various forms of killing. Death by accident happens more often to the clumsy or the stupid than it does to the smart and agile. Death by predator happens more often to the slow and stupid than it does to the smart and fast. It is a good thing for individuals to be agile, smart, and fast. Why, aren't those traits heritable? Yes, yes they are. And can't intelligent breeding concentrate desireable characters in a race? Yes, yes it can.

Cloning can give genes for quickness, intelligence and athletic ability more chances to propagate. Simply find athletic geniuses, screen them for family histories of heritable medical problems, and clone away. Give the babies to good homes. Raise them at state expense--a better investment was never made. As Lois McMaster Bujold wisely said in one of her novels: "All true wealth is biological." Amen. And eugenics is the way to play the stock market well.
           
 
Jenab6
10/11/09
replied to: solos90
Replied To:  Totally agree with you. Playing God is not something that we should...
We should not generate or use electricity then, since doing the "let there be light!" thing is also among the functions of divinity.
           
 
Jenab6
10/11/09
replied to: clairemaria
Replied To:  I agree that we are already overpopulated so I do not think human c...
Voluntary methods of population control fail because whatever genes promote compliance behavior get deleted by natural selection from the gene pool. The "responsible" people, who limit their breeding, get outbred and replaced by the "reckless" people, who kept on breeding as fast as they could.

Forcible measures to limit births at the national level also have a potential problem. At least, they do if technology can't make up, in terms of national defense, what a reduction in the number of soldiers takes away. A country that assiduously ensures that its population is kept down might become vulnerable to conquest by a more numerous neighbor country, after which its population might go from limited (by birth control) to zero (by military genocide). And once again the "reckless" rapid breeders win the game.

Nature provided a way for humans to keep their numbers down: low-technology warfare. We're actually supposed to fight each other, to partition ourselves off in clannish tribal groups and make plans to exterminate our rival clannish tribal groups. In that way, the victors will limit the human load on the biosphere by killing the losers, and at the same time the struggles will generally go in favor of the stronger and smarter peoples. Over the generations, the human species would improve, as well as staying within sustainable numbers.

But along came the "universal brotherhood" religions, and the liberal sentimentalists, and the fossil fuel industries, and spoiled nature's whole game. For that, we shall pay a price when we start running low on fossil fuels and discover that we are far into resource overshoot. The human die-off that will follow will dwarf anything that man has ever done to himself with war.
           
 
Verinsess
10/11/09
replied to: amorze
Replied To:  There are so many objections to human cloning that I could not even...
This problem began millions of years ago, when Eve ate an apple. Eve caused humans to gain higher knowledge. Thus, science orginated. Over time science conflicted with ethics. We must deal with our own demons we invited.
           
 
Jenab6
10/12/09
replied to: 1jah2haile34
[POST DELETED]
"...just walking zombies! or Night of the Living Dead ! There is a FUNGUS, AMONG us!!!"

That is not true. Your clone is an individual person. His personality will be every bit as real as anyone else's. The only significant difference between your clone and an identical twin is that your twin is the same age as you are, whereas your clone can be several decades younger than you are.
           
 
Jenab6
10/12/09
replied to: Owenbomar
Replied To:  I agree 100% the moral and phisical problems ruin any benifits
"I agree 100% the moral and phisical problems ruin any benifits"

That is not true. There are no unusual physical problems in producing a clone. Even if a surrogate mother is hired to gestate the cloned baby, the gestation is in no way different than the gestation of a naturally conceived baby.

There are, likewise, no moral problems in producing a clone. Your clone is simply someone whose DNA is the same as yours. If there were moral problems with that, then there would be exactly the same moral problems with identical twins. Since there are no moral problems in the existence of identical twins, there are also no moral problems in producing a clone.
           
 
Jenab6
10/12/09
replied to: theres22
Replied To:  I think its more likely to be the old cosmetic versus medicine argu...
"I think its more likely to be the old cosmetic versus medicine argument if youre looking to make designer babies..definately bad Idea...however if you think about the potential to restrict natures' natural problems maybe not all bad..???"

One moment here. Let us think a moment about what designed babies are likely to be designed FOR.

No parent is likely to want to design a baby that is some kind of freak.

Nobody is likely to want to design a baby that is weak, stupid, slow, clumsy, awkward, ugly, vision-impaired, lacking in stamina, or unusually susceptible to disease.

The babies that get designed will be unusual only in good ways. Parents will want their children to be strong, smart, quick, dexterous, agile, good-looking, resistant to disease, and possessed of perfect vision and great stamina.

Do any of you see something wrong with that?

Well, all right then. Clone away.
           
 
theres22
10/12/09
replied to: amorze
Replied To:  There are so many objections to human cloning that I could not even...
What would happen if a song kept playing for ever...??? you wouldn't really be able to class it as a song. all good things must have a beggining and end. I don't believe it is a question of immortality but maybe just a matter of improvement...somebody else in this forum had argued that human destiny is to die at war..and that in some respects that geneocide is acceptable..I don't know if this person has had previous bad experiences with disease. I would agree that hybredisation and resistance to disease may assist and reduce the need for clannish wars and generally improve society as whole..unless, like the person argueing for massacre in the field, you wanted to create a canvas for basic genetic clones without animosity for origin to be slaughter en masse...pretty pointless really if you look at it like that. If it did ever become reality to clone in this way I would have to argue for exemplification and purpose not simply production.
           
 
1jah2haile34
10/12/09
replied to: Jenab6
Replied To:  "...just walking zombies! or Night of the Living Dead ! There is a ...
Greetings Jenab6
First of all I hope there is no "pun" intended by your log-in name'Jenab6" Anyhow You must live in Stephen King's Fantasy World. Ask yourself: How did I Get here??? Wether you follow the Biblical or Evolutionary theories there is and will always remain ONE WAY to concieve. S.E.X.!!!! Any argument after this is of Homosexual nature,or Satanic/Anti-Nature call it what you will. The FACT remains the same. Once you tamper with the Original in anything it gets messed up and can NEVER be the SAME or Better!!!! You might want to argue "Technological advancements" But as we advance technologically we are messing up Planet Earth. Why??? Once you leave the Original/Orthodox way you get exactly what you see going on in the News around the World Today. Nice.... is'nt it??? The ONLY purpose to Cloning is so that the ILLUMINATI and those Big Boys can Clone the Original Masters of the Earth!!! Like: Imhotep,King TutAnkhAmen,Caesar,Napoleon etc....To bring them back to Life or to Copy their Greatness,Diligence,Mastery,Authority,Reverence and especially their SECRETS!!! New World Odour?/Order!!!!
According to the Bible Satan can do everything he is the Master of deception. But one thing he can not do is Blow the Breath of Life into Man!!! NOW SATAN IS TRYING ANOTHER METHOD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
           
 
1jah2haile34
10/12/09
replied to: theres22
Replied To:  It has to be agreed that it is most definately the physical/mental ...
What???
           
 
Posts  1 - 50  of  202