Originally Posted by
hanz0
I'm also unsure exactly what I'm misrepresenting about said posts. The points I brought up were all valid issues with the posts. Using a clone of yourself to undertake your responsibilities requires that the clone be the same age as you. Creating clone armies requires the same or accelerated aging or about 20 years of foresight. Cloning an individual other than yourself requires that you have access to their genomes.
Unless, of course, you were simply throwing around "OMG LOGICAL FALLACY" because you think it advances the discussion and/or makes you feel superior*. Sometimes people do that.
* This is the part where you go "OMG AD HOMINEM THAT MEANS I WIN THE ARGUMENT" and then nobody pays attention.
OMG AD HOMINEM THAT MEANS I WIN THE ARGUMENT
As you said, the points you brought up were all valid points; however, they are navigatable. The "using a clone to take up the same responsibilities as you" issue, you have a completely accurate point. However, in basic household chores, a clone of six or seven years is more than sufficient for taking over basic duties. Sure, there is no immediate result, but there is the potential for future responsibility alleviation.
As for the army: twenty year foresight isn't impossible, especially not for many governments. Sure, predicting a war outright is outrageous, but preparing during times of conflict (e.g. Early Cold War) is more than reasonable. It would have its uses.
As for rights to genomes--I would say that is a whole separate topic. I think what's being assumed is that you have access to human's genomes, otherwise there is almost no reason to discuss human cloning. You're, again, correct that we'd need access though. I personally think that many people would be willing to submit themselves for cloning (assuming that it is proven to work and regulated by a corporation or government). I have no evidence for or against that though, so feel free to ignore that claim.
I was trying to point out that you're attacking their claims based on the lack of immediate result. With a bit of foresight and time though, most of what they said is at least semi-plausible. You are not incorrect on any point, however.