We are working on a brand new version of the game! If you want to stay informed, read our blog and register for our mailing list.
Bill: Human Cloning
Details
Submitted by[?]: Tuesday Is Coming
Status[?]: passed
Votes: This is an ordinary bill. It requires more yes votes than no votes. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.
Voting deadline: April 2074
Description[?]:
| Preamble As the government has little reason to care if humans clone other humans, we propose that human cloning be made legal. Article I a) The cloning of human beings shall henceforth be legal, but only if the parties performing the cloning have obtained written permission from the original human. b) The clone shall be a citizen of whichever country, county, and state the Original is a citizen of. c) The birth certificate of all clones shall include the original's name, as well as his/her parent's names. It shall be labeled as well to indicate that such an individual is a clone. Article II a) In no case is a company to retain information sensitive to a cloning without the originals express knowledge and consent. b) Such information may only be used in manners proscribed by law, provided the owner(s) of the DNA provide written permission at least ninety days in advance. c) The DNA shall not be permitted to be used for cloning if the genetic information contained on it has been modified in any way. Individual organs may be cloned after modification(s), with the exception of the human brain. Article III a) The original person shall retain ownership of his/her DNA, but shall only be permitted to sell this if, and only if, the clone agrees to do so as well and has attained the age of majority. b) The "rights"(corporate and otherwise) to an individual's DNA shall be jointly owned between all persons born possessing this DNA. Article IV a) The original shall provide the legal guardianship of any clones. b) Such guardianship may be transferred at birth or through other means provided by law. Article V a) Cloning of any person without their prior(ninety days), written permission shall be considered a felony of the highest degree, punishable by fines and/or life in prison. b) Any accessory parties involved in performing, or otherwise facillitating, such a cloning, shall be sentenced as well. The punishments shall vary according to involvement. c) In the case of such an offense, the clone shall be placed under the care of the state until a suitable adoption or foster parent can be found. Article VI In all criminal cases involving clones, or parties known to have been cloned, DNA evidence may be presented, but in no case is to be used as a deciding factor. Conviction shall only be permitted if substantial supportive evidence is also present. Article VII Any legislation in effect that pertains to discrimination, especially concerning minorities shall apply to clones as a minority group. No legislation shall exist for clones, however, unless it also applies to other groups that happen to be included in such laws. Article VIII a) The above shall not be construed to apply to any non-human DNA or cloning. b) For all purposes relevant to this law, "Human" shall be defined as any mammal with twenty-three chromosome pairs, belonging to the species Homo Sapiens by genetic descent from other humans. Clones of any human shall be considered human as well. c) The government reserves the right to enforce, alter, or abolish this policy by appropriate legislation. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Government policy towards the cloning of human beings.
Old value:: The cloning of human beings is illegal.
Current: The cloning of human beings is illegal.
Proposed: Research in cloning technologies is legal, but regulated.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 18:52:00, June 20, 2005 CET | From |  Tuesday Is Coming | To | Debating the Human Cloning |
| Message | Here is the law as it stands now: Government policy towards the cloning of human beings. The cloning of human beings is illegal. Alternatives: Research in cloning technologies is not regulated. Research in cloning technologies is legal, but regulated. |
| Date | 19:19:19, June 20, 2005 CET | From | Adam Smith Party | To | Debating the Human Cloning |
| Message | Cloning, of humans, would constitute a medical procedure. As such it should fall under the existing regulations of medical practice. I see no need for a special law for this procedure. However as others semm to think that this is in someway different to any other medical procedure, let us allow it but subject to regulation. This regulation being the regulation of medical practice already in place. |
| Date | 22:28:49, June 20, 2005 CET | From | CNT/AFL | To | Debating the Human Cloning |
| Message | Cloning of human organs and embryos is already permitted, I see no reason why we should create countless problems for us and our descendents by legalizing and deregulation human cloning. |
| Date | 22:37:34, June 20, 2005 CET | From | Cooperative Commonwealth Federation | To | Debating the Human Cloning |
| Message | Which proposal are you intending to add, TiC? |
| Date | 00:25:18, June 21, 2005 CET | From | Tuesday Is Coming | To | Debating the Human Cloning |
| Message | I would be fine with either one. I would like to deregulate, but regulated is fine with me, and much better than the current condition. I will add whichever seems to have the most unanimous support. If the more moderate option is more popular, that will be fine with me. As things appear now, that is actually the most likely. |
| Date | 00:26:44, June 21, 2005 CET | From | Tuesday Is Coming | To | Debating the Human Cloning |
| Message | Theres just not much point in proposing a bill just so it can be shot down. Or without debating it. |
| Date | 00:30:45, June 21, 2005 CET | From | Tuesday Is Coming | To | Debating the Human Cloning |
| Message | "Cloning of human organs and embryos is already permitted, I see no reason why we should create countless problems for us and our descendents by legalizing and deregulation human cloning." Show me the law, or resolution that permits such activities. I cannot find one. As such, we must assume that they are illegal, based on this law. Current stances: ASP: allow regulated CNT/AFL: forbid TIC: allow, or regulated sorry for the triple post... |
| Date | 00:49:04, June 21, 2005 CET | From | Cooperative Commonwealth Federation | To | Debating the Human Cloning |
| Message | The bill seems to have disappeared along with the Shylock Party which wrote it. But it stated that research was allowed, subject to the ban on cloning an entire human being, which is a fair position. If you want to re-legislate on thnis, the CCF-Greens would support a shift to "Research in cloning technologies is legal, but regulated," but it should be stated that organs may be cloned, not entire human beings, and we would like a proviso in the bill stating that the individual retains ownership of her own DNA, so that corporations can't try to own human DNA. |
| Date | 01:22:33, June 21, 2005 CET | From | Tuesday Is Coming | To | Debating the Human Cloning |
| Message | What if an individual chooses to sell their DNA ownership rights... Why is it necessary to ban entire people, but not bits and pieces? |
| Date | 03:28:30, June 21, 2005 CET | From | CNT/AFL | To | Debating the Human Cloning |
| Message | We would not object to the CCF's proposals. |
| Date | 05:11:51, June 21, 2005 CET | From | Tuesday Is Coming | To | Debating the Human Cloning |
| Message | Still, why would you two only support cloning of body portions? What is the cutoff? 25% of the body? 75%, 99%? Just not 100%? |
| Date | 16:31:38, June 21, 2005 CET | From | Chorus of Amyst | To | Debating the Human Cloning |
| Message | (( TiC, CCF's right about the cloning of organs and such already being legal, just so you know he's not making it up :D )) |
| Date | 09:53:37, June 22, 2005 CET | From | Tuesday Is Coming | To | Debating the Human Cloning |
| Message | Didnt think he was...I just can never find anything in the books... |
| Date | 21:00:06, June 23, 2005 CET | From | CNT/AFL | To | Debating the Human Cloning |
| Message | "Still, why would you two only support cloning of body portions? What is the cutoff? 25% of the body? 75%, 99%? Just not 100%?" Because we wouldn't want two Damien Vrylars walking around. |
| Date | 22:20:05, June 23, 2005 CET | From | Tuesday Is Coming | To | Debating the Human Cloning |
| Message | People control then? |
| Date | 01:07:15, June 24, 2005 CET | From | Adam Smith Party | To | Debating the Human Cloning |
| Message | What a naïve misunderstanding of cloning CNT. To recreate the body is not to recreate the person. Or was it just that Damien Vrylars was horrendously ugly? |
| Date | 20:53:13, June 24, 2005 CET | From | National People's Gang | To | Debating the Human Cloning |
| Message | Do you mean "naive" misunderstanding, or naive "misunderstanding". And do you have anything that's not for sale? Because we can sell you a dictionary but we'd prefer to swap it for a kidney. |
| Date | 20:57:49, June 24, 2005 CET | From | National People's Gang | To | Debating the Human Cloning |
| Message | Damien Vrylars wasn't such a bad man, he just got the job at the wrong time. (Although according to a newly-told folk tale in Rapula, he was - and still is - a remarkably ugly man. Also he ate babies raw) |
| Date | 23:12:41, June 24, 2005 CET | From | Adam Smith Party | To | Debating the Human Cloning |
| Message | If the representative of the Equitista party would worry less about the niceties of grammar and a little more about the content of the debate, it would help us move forward. (OOC It may be you that needs the dictionary. Naïve has an accent, and a misunderstanding can easily be naïve without any need for quotations OK) We have many things that are not for sale, including our ethics unlike some around us. What relevance does swapping a kidney have to the debate on the limit of cloning? We were making a point on the difference between two geneticaly identical bodies and two copies of the same person, we regret to note that you seem to have failed to grasp the point. If you require it explaining in detail, please submit a written question and we will happily address the issue. |
| Date | 04:56:44, June 25, 2005 CET | From | National People's Gang | To | Debating the Human Cloning |
| Message | No, no questions. Wake me when it gets interesting. |
| Date | 07:46:22, June 25, 2005 CET | From | Tuesday Is Coming | To | Debating the Human Cloning |
| Message | first off...The bill concerns the entire cloning of voluntary humans. I suppose the right to a clone could be revoked upon a felony conviction or something. Second: Economically speaking, bans on organ sales, but allowing donations, sets a price ceiling at 0 for the given market. This explains the severe shortage of organ donors in most countrys. We would support a partial organ subsidy, so that such products were not elitist. Please just say why or why not you think that the above proposal should be passed. If an agreeable compromise can be reached(DNA rights, legal guidelines, etc.), we will add it into the proposal. Let us move this in a direction so that it can be voted upon. Thank you. |
| Date | 08:18:56, June 25, 2005 CET | From | Tuesday Is Coming | To | Debating the Human Cloning |
| Message | I have helped to define what regulation will be present. Comments/suggestions appreciated here. |
| Date | 18:03:54, June 25, 2005 CET | From | CNT/AFL | To | Debating the Human Cloning |
| Message | "Economically speaking, bans on organ sales, but allowing donations, sets a price ceiling at 0 for the given market. This explains the severe shortage of organ donors in most countrys." I think automatic collection of organs at the death of a citizen, with an opt out mechanism would be a far easier method to solve this conundrum, without stepping into an ethical quagmire. |
| Date | 20:08:09, June 25, 2005 CET | From | Adam Smith Party | To | Debating the Human Cloning |
| Message | Why is cloning seen as an ethical quagmire. Are identical twins an ethical problem? The bill as written addresses the major concerns. There concept of rights tro DNA is more than a little strange however. DNA is discovered, not created, it is a chemical that has a specific sequence of elements and is already in the public domain, and as such attributing rights to it is difficult. This aspect of DNA is of much wider concern though than just human cloning. If a company discovers the DNA sequence of a super penicillin does this mean that it owns the DNA or just that it hapens to know something that others can discover and use if they research it. We tend to hold with the latter. Now cloning, without genetic modification should be acceptable. There is however a problem in correcting genetic errors and in genetic enhancement. Not only does this produce ethical issues it also produceds ownership issues as now we would be dealing with produced and not discovered material. As such there should be a clause in the bill that prohibits any and all genetic modification in the cloning process. This is tough on the bearers of genetic diseases, but until such time as we can define clearly the difference between repair and enhancement it has to be prohibited. |
| Date | 10:26:44, June 26, 2005 CET | From | Chorus of Amyst | To | Debating the Human Cloning |
| Message | Just because President-Councillor Vrylar was bald does not mean he was horrendously ugly. |
| Date | 05:35:32, June 27, 2005 CET | From | Tuesday Is Coming | To | Debating the Human Cloning |
| Message | We appreciate the Adam Smith Party's concerns. The idea was that an individual had the right to control how his/her personal DNA was used. However, we felt it necessary to include all persons possessing that DNA in the decision. As Penicillin has no property rights, we would not consider this an issue for such an organism. We will wait to amend the proposal, pending the next response. |
| Date | 05:35:59, June 27, 2005 CET | From | Tuesday Is Coming | To | Debating the Human Cloning |
| Message | [edit]*responses...for simplicities sake |
| Date | 20:44:55, June 27, 2005 CET | From | Tuesday Is Coming | To | Debating the Human Cloning |
| Message | Changes made to articles: II(c) VIII(a) Are we ready for a vote or is more discussion required? |
| Date | 21:08:38, June 27, 2005 CET | From | Adam Smith Party | To | Debating the Human Cloning |
| Message | Where genetic modification of alelles of non human origin is permitted, we are going to need a clear definition of what constitutes a human, not based on genetics. Otherwise we take a chimpanzee and with a little modification create something that is to all intents and purposes a human, but as it has chimp DNA it is not a human as well. Big problem as we can not see how to avoid this but also allow GM techniques in agriculture. |
| Date | 00:50:29, June 28, 2005 CET | From | Tuesday Is Coming | To | Debating the Human Cloning |
| Message | Do you have any suggestions upon how to do this? I would like for this to be submitted before the next election. |
| Date | 01:38:50, June 28, 2005 CET | From | Adam Smith Party | To | Debating the Human Cloning |
| Message | For now: Human = born of a human mother. Either naturally or by section, but having been gestated in the womb of a human. We also could prohibit genetic engineering work on any life form with 23 chromosome pairs |
| Date | 01:55:15, June 28, 2005 CET | From | Tuesday Is Coming | To | Debating the Human Cloning |
| Message | VIII(b) added |
| Date | 21:07:07, June 28, 2005 CET | From | Tuesday Is Coming | To | Debating the Human Cloning |
| Message | Would there be any objections to submitting this bill as it stands now? |
| Date | 07:34:59, June 29, 2005 CET | From | Tuesday Is Coming | To | Debating the Human Cloning |
| Message | Very well then, amendments can be made later as separate bills. I would like to have this decided before the election. |
| Date | 06:06:31, June 30, 2005 CET | From | Tuesday Is Coming | To | Debating the Human Cloning |
| Message | We thank the parties currently supporting this bill. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 217 | |||||
| no |
Total Seats: 105 | |||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 128 |
| Random fact: It is not allowed to call more than 5 elections in 5 game years in a nation. The default sanction for a player persisting in the early election tactic will be a seat reset. |
| Random quote: "What difference does it make to the dead, the orphans, and the homeless, whether the mad destruction is wrought under the name of totalitarianism or the holy name of liberty and democracy?" - Mahatma Gandhi. |