No, because Riker and Pulaski themselves were not, and the clones were obtained without their authorization.
Pulaski and Riker clone killing ethical?
- Thread starter marsh8472
- Start date
No, because Riker and Pulaski themselves were not, and the clones were obtained without their authorization.
Indeed. To be fair they are pretty high maintenance little bastards.
Brings up a key point...did Riker and Pulaski fill out the correct XR47/d "Authorization to Vaporize Biomatter in Enclosed environment" forms?? OHSA is gonna be all over them...
The original cells stolen from Riker and Pulaski you could call property that belonged to them. The organic material used to create the cloned cells belonged to the Mariposan government. In that respect the cloned material may belong to the Mariposan government.
It's kind of like intellectual property and copyright issues. If I steal a DVD and make copies of the DVD with my own blank DVD's the physical media may belong to me but the data on that DVD may not depending on how the laws are written.
Now if the Mariposan government have laws or a constitution that states cloned cells do not belong to the version that was copied they could have a legal or moral argument that terminating clones is destruction of Mariposan property.
Oaths doctors take four hundred years from now would likely be much different from the oaths that doctor's take nowadays. Today, medical schools that administer the Hippocratic Oath use a modernized version, and many use something different such as the Declaration of Geneva, or their own particular oath. Such oaths aren't legally binding, and there is ongoing debate about how appropriate and relevant they are, as many are just vague formal platitudes that are arguably inadequate in addressing the complex realities of contemporary medical practice, and don't really even hold physicians accountable for acting contrary to the oath.
Kor
Once the cells began to split and grow, they belonged to the clones. The Mariposans owned the equipment, but not the clones themselves.
Riker and Pulaski again didn't own the clones, once the original stolen cells began increasing in numbers, the original cells no long existed as separation material.
Not yet anyway, because they hadn't decided on everything yet, the most important factor being what Troi wanted to do. Still not a condemnation of Pulaski's ethical standards imho
There is no verification of any kind to indicate that the clones are alive yet. Thus, they're not rightful owners of anything. They're partially formed, inert, meat sacks, on a slab. However, the DNA, from which they are in the process of being made, does belong to Riker & Pulaski. It's a more advanced, 24th century equivalent of identity theft, & they're within their ethical rights to terminate them, since they aren't alive yet
I can't believe Ron Moore thinks this is one of TNG's worst. That's great dialogue.
I don't agree. The clones were derived from stolen genetic material, obtained by what can only be described as an assault (not a particularly violent one, I admit, but it's still an assault) against two innocent people. Anything derived from stolen property is still stolen.
For example, if you stole some seeds from the local grocery store or your neighbor's garden, and grew them yourself, you're not entitled to have the fruits or vegetables thus grown. Same story here.
Not alive, as in dead? No, I don't believe the clones were dead, they were living and developing Human Beings.
But again, the clones could not have been held responsible for a thief that they had no part in. So why did Riker kill innocent parties?
But people are not "fruits or vegetables." If a woman steals a man's sperm and creates a child, can the man then at a later date kill the child? I would call that unethical.
After a few decades of tightening of intellectual property rights, you might find yourself in a minority. (Or, more probably, an enraged but impotent majority). 
As a brief aside, Picard's ethics may well get a pass at closer examination of "Time Squared". While his other self dies from the phaser hit, there is no pressing reason to assume the phaser was set to kill. The fact that the time-copy is frail has been amply established. We know that phaser on stun can kill. The present Picard gets his phaser literally off the shelf, where the weapons supposedly are stored at low setting. We don't see him readjust the gun. And while the beam creates sparkles and smoke at impact, this is not unheard of for stun beams. OTOH, possibly the temporally shifted nature of the other Picard was the cause of this, and also sealed his fate? Ultimately, Picard had little reason to kill - and we have little reason to think he intended to kill, as his actions would be consistent with nonlethal stopping as well. Else why not gun down the time-copy right away?
Timo Saloniemi
As a brief aside, Picard's ethics may well get a pass at closer examination of "Time Squared". While his other self dies from the phaser hit, there is no pressing reason to assume the phaser was set to kill. The fact that the time-copy is frail has been amply established. We know that phaser on stun can kill. The present Picard gets his phaser literally off the shelf, where the weapons supposedly are stored at low setting. We don't see him readjust the gun. And while the beam creates sparkles and smoke at impact, this is not unheard of for stun beams. OTOH, possibly the temporally shifted nature of the other Picard was the cause of this, and also sealed his fate? Ultimately, Picard had little reason to kill - and we have little reason to think he intended to kill, as his actions would be consistent with nonlethal stopping as well. Else why not gun down the time-copy right away?
Timo Saloniemi
Nobody is being held responsible for anything. There are no "innocent parties", because the clones WERE NOT ALIVE.
See above. The child is alive; the clones were not.
Surely they would go necrotic if their hearts (or external technological aids) weren't already pumping blood? At that point, the fierce debate about "alive or not" is already in full swing... And if we for our part deny the old definition "heart pumping = alive", then we in turn must agree to abandon our own early 21st century prejudices and accept that the future folks may have very different definitions of "alive".
Timo Saloniemi
Timo Saloniemi
I'd say the cells that make up the organism are alive just like they would be with a fetus. Just to make sure everyone is on the same page, what you're really saying is that the organism as a whole is not alive because it is not an organism yet. Is that correct?
^ Basically, yes. The cells making up the clones were alive (they couldn't grow if they weren't). However the clones themselves were not yet alive - they were just vaguely humanoid shapes of tissue.
I never said dead. I said not yet alive. What indications from within the episode, do you have to assume these are living cloned humans?
I've already stated two reasons why we should just assume they aren't. #1, they are shown to be incomplete & inert. A human develops the way babies do... Embryos. This isn't the same as that. They're being formed as adult humans on a molecular level, & human bodies aren't designed to be able to function that way
And if that's still too vague, we have reason #2. Riker destroys them, rather indifferently, & we know of Will Riker's character that he is not someone who executes people indifferently.
And even if I accept that possibility, that this cloning process is somehow capable of allowing the person to be alive while it's still being formed, it's still unlikely, because Riker & Pulaski treat them as though they aren't. They know the 24th century definition of alive, as it applies to humans, and don't act as if it applies here, which by their established character, they surely would otherwise. So in that event, it's just sound thinking to accept that these clones are not yet alive for possibly both reasons
I really don't know how clearer we can make this point. LOL
Maybe the clones should be considered alive, maybe not. In the event they are considered living and sentient at the moment they were killed could it still be considered a moral act using the same reasoning that Torres used to destroy prototype unit 0001 in episode "prototype"?
3947: When it was anticipated that the war would end, the Builders no longer required our services and they intended to terminate us. In doing so, they became the enemy. We are programmed to destroy the enemy. It is necessary for our survival. Now that you have constructed a prototype, we will soon outnumber the Cravic units. We will achieve victory.
(Boom! Fires break out.)
3947: This is unit 3947. Fire units report to reconstruction bay number one.
TORRES: The individual energy codes. Is that why the builders added them? To prevent the procreation of these units? My god, what have I done?
(She picks up a tool from a bench.)
0001: Prototype unit 0001 is ready to accept programming.
(And stabs it through the power module. 3947 zaps Torres.)
3947: You have terminated the prototype.
TORRES: Yes, I have.
3947: You will build another.
TORRES: Never.
3947: Lieutenant B'Elanna Torres, I told 6263 you were not our enemy.
TORRES: I never wanted to be your enemy. I'm sorry.
3947: When it was anticipated that the war would end, the Builders no longer required our services and they intended to terminate us. In doing so, they became the enemy. We are programmed to destroy the enemy. It is necessary for our survival. Now that you have constructed a prototype, we will soon outnumber the Cravic units. We will achieve victory.
(Boom! Fires break out.)
3947: This is unit 3947. Fire units report to reconstruction bay number one.
TORRES: The individual energy codes. Is that why the builders added them? To prevent the procreation of these units? My god, what have I done?
(She picks up a tool from a bench.)
0001: Prototype unit 0001 is ready to accept programming.
(And stabs it through the power module. 3947 zaps Torres.)
3947: You have terminated the prototype.
TORRES: Yes, I have.
3947: You will build another.
TORRES: Never.
3947: Lieutenant B'Elanna Torres, I told 6263 you were not our enemy.
TORRES: I never wanted to be your enemy. I'm sorry.
In that case, while 0001 was indeed alive when Torres killed it, she did so as an act of self-defense.
Also because the very fact that she helped build it in the first place is (technically) a violation of the Prime Directive, so she acted to correct that interference.
Also because the very fact that she helped build it in the first place is (technically) a violation of the Prime Directive, so she acted to correct that interference.
In both cases copies were made to help a race reproduce. Though the clone race was human where the prime directive wouldn't apply unless we read into Picards statements in episode masterpiece society
PICARD: Come.
RIKER: The colonists are all on board, sir.
PICARD: How many finally?
RIKER: Twenty three.
PICARD: If we ever needed reminding of the importance of the Prime Directive, it is now.
RIKER: The Prime Directive doesn't apply. They're human.
PICARD: Doesn't it? Our very presence may have damaged, even destroyed, their way of life. Whether or not we agree with that way of life or whether they're human or not is irrelevant, Number One. We are responsible.
RIKER: We had to respond to the threat from the core fragment didn't we?
PICARD: Of course we did. But in the end we may have proved just as dangerous to that colony as any core fragment could ever have been.
In thinking more about this notion, I actually can't assume such to be the case. Obviously, the heart wouldn't be functioning during the process of being formed itself. Therefore, it's reasonable to assume that whatever this process is, it allows cell generation of whole organs & systems, in its matrix, without necrosis of any parts therein. It wouldn't be a very sensible manufacturing process to endow something with functionality while you're still trying to form it. Imagine trying to design a car manufacturing plant that builds the cars while they're running? Just not very sensible, least of all when you begin factoring in the concepts of human consciousness or cerebral function that's necessary for someone to be a fully functional person
This whole episode would've been very different if Riker had come upon their cloning lab & found fetuses in fully formed states, with fully functioning cerebral cortexes, that are consistent with a developmental stage that's about 24 weeks into prenatal development. Then we'd have the same argument about abortion which plagues our culture today. Currently, we stand by a rule of law that such a stage of development is in fact a living person who's termination is paramount to murder, but that's not what we have in this episode. These clones are being made cell by cell into full grown adults. I just can't see how it would function as a living human until all of it was done, & I'm curious if anyone can offer anything verifiable from the episode that might put even a shadow of doubt forth to suggest otherwise