Would You Clone Your Pet?

[Marionnette]

I couldn't sleep last night and ended up channel surfing for something that would bore me to death so I could drift off. I saw this program on TLC called "I Cloned My Pet". It followed 3 people who were obsessed with their deceased dogs, to the point where they spent $50K to have them cloned.

Now, I love my dogs but I would never clone them. They are unique and wonderful additions to my life but every dog I've owned was not a replacement for one that I've lost. Each of the people profiled seemed to be looking to resurrect their former pet. In fact, all of the clones were named the same as their genetic twin.

I couldn't afford to throw $50K away at the process anyway, but I don't think that I would do it even if the price came down to an affordable level. Would you?

 

[dngnb8]

yes

 

[burnurcomputer]

No, but I will spend it to have carbon pulled from my ashes to make my kids a stone after I die.

 

[roliepolieoliefan]

My first collie I owned was very unique. She had alot of non collie characteristics but was a collie. Not sure if that makes sense. You may have to own a collie to understand it.

I had to put her down at the ripe old age of 16 , about 6 years ago. I still miss her. I have 2 other collies now , who I love with all my heart, but there will never be another Natasha.

I'm not obsessed with her or anything but yea if someone said I'll pay to have Natasha cloned, I would have jumped at the opportunity.

 

[bballmom56]

No, because although it would look like the deceased pet, the personality could be totally different. It wouldn't be the exact same pet.

 

[Wall-E1]

No. A pet is individual and unique. You may end up with a pet that has the same appearance, but they obviously will not have the same memories, mannerisms; etc. Cloning a pet just seems wrong. I feel it disrespects the deceased pet by turning a pet from a unique member of the family into just another thing that can be replaced.

 

[dngnb8]

No. A pet is individual and unique. You may end up with a pet that has the same appearance, but they obviously will not have the same memories, mannerisms; etc. Cloning a pet just seems wrong. I feel it disrespects the deceased pet by turning a pet from a unique member of the family into just another thing that can be replaced.

To me, it isnt a copy, but a descendant. Like having a puppy or kitten of my baby.

 

[AlwaysMoving]

No, because although it would look like the deceased pet, the personality could be totally different. It wouldn't be the exact same pet.

That is my reason. There is something unique about every cat I have owned. I know there will be something about the future ones that I will find equally unique and adorable. So yeah, we all know the personality is not going to be the same with a clone. What would be the point unless you had some mutt that would take a miracle to have another that looked identical or if you show dogs and had a champion and wanted to clone it.

 

[Wall-E1]

To me, it isnt a copy, but a descendant. Like having a puppy or kitten of my baby.

But it isn't a puppy or kitten of the parent. It is an exact clone of the deceased pet. I would find that mildly creepy - knowing my pet has moved on, yet seeing an exact clone of it running around my house. Just my opinion, though.

 

[Pixiedust34]

No. I had a dog I miss dearly, but I wouldn't have cloned her.

 

[luvmy3]

No, its a little too Pet Sematary for me.

 

[Hoodie]

No, because although it would look like the deceased pet, the personality could be totally different. It wouldn't be the exact same pet.

Exactly. Genetically it would be identical, but it would still be a completely different pet. Think of identical twins. Technically nature's clone, but one couldn't replace the other.

I saw the first 5 minutes of this show and thought what they really need to do is spend that $50k on therapy. One guy was actually hoping that the clone dog would recognize him. Sad, pathetic, and uneducated.

 

[diznee25]

Nope, we wouldn't do it. To me it would be harder getting over a pets death if you had an "almost" duplicate of it. It would just be a constant reminder that my original dog isn't here anymore. And you'd always be comparing the new dog to your old dog. Although, one might do that whether you clone or adopt another dog.

We recorded the cloning dog show on TLC, we'll have to watch that later. DH and I saw a show awhile back about people who stuffed their dogs! You know, taxidermy. Now that was creepy!

diznee25

 

[natenapril]

But it isn't a puppy or kitten of the parent. It is an exact clone of the deceased pet. I would find that mildly creepy - knowing my pet has moved on, yet seeing an exact clone of it running around my house. Just my opinion, though.

I think it would be creepy too. I recently lost my 13 year old Golden retriever and still miss him dearly. In no way shape or form would I clone him though.

No, its a little too Pet Sematary for me.

Exactly! I thought I was the only one who immediately thought of pet cemetery!

 

[dngnb8]

But it isn't a puppy or kitten of the parent. It is an exact clone of the deceased pet.

Who says I would wait for the pet to be deceased? That being said, the kitten or puppy is of the identical genome. Just because it is identical, doesnt mean it isnt a kitten or puppy.

It will have its own personality, quirks etc. The only real measurable connection is the looks.

 

[Wall-E1]

Who says I would wait for the pet to be deceased? That being said, the kitten or puppy is of the identical genome. Just because it is identical, doesnt mean it isnt a kitten or puppy.

It will have its own personality, quirks etc. The only real measurable connection is the looks.

To me, this is also creepy and weird - duplicating your living pets and having exact copies of them running around the house. Again, just my opinion - to each his own.

 

[diznee25]

Who says I would wait for the pet to be deceased? That being said, the kitten or puppy is of the identical genome. Just because it is identical, doesnt mean it isnt a kitten or puppy.

It will have its own personality, quirks etc. The only real measurable connection is the looks.

I think Wall-E1 is saying the puppy/kitten is not a daughter/son to the deceased pet. It's not offspring. It's identical DNA.

But of course they are still puppies/kittens.

diznee25

 

[bballmom56]

For the $50k it would take to create another animal, I would rather take that money and put it toward helping the animals that are already here. We would definitely adopt another animal from a rescue or shelter to give it a forever home, just as we did with our others that have passed. No need to recreate the ones we had. They were special and one of a kind and should remain so.

 

[Wall-E1]

duplicate post

 

[MichelleVW]

I think it's creepy and a huge waste of money.
One, all of my pets are individuals and no way would I want to cheapen their memory by "making a new one".

Two, if I had that kind of money to waste on nonsense how about I do something good and donate that money to a shelter so they can do some good and adopt a perfectly fine pet for $100.

Three and here's where I have a HUGE problem with this...these things are done in South Korea where they EAT dogs!! So...after they take your cloned dog from the mother they send her back to the dog farm where she becomes someones dinner.