MovieChat Forums > Never Let Me Go (2010) Discussion > So no Catholics or Christians in this wo...

So no Catholics or Christians in this world?

posted 10 years ago by lucianolvr
14 replies | jump to latest

I found it interesting that the world in which this story takes place offers no organized protest to the whole cloning idea. In our world, the Catholics would have center stage in opposing the practice of human cloning for any purpose, and I'm sure many other Christian orders would follow suit. It's always interesting to me when an author places a story in a similar world, but a world lacking some massive sociological fixture such as the Catholic Church.

Love me some Waltons

[–] greg-233 10 years ago

Elsewhere on this board I posted a quote from Gina Kolata's 1997 book Clone:

If Dolly [the sheep] had been born in 1956, rather than 1996, it is likely that the world's reaction would have been radically different. Yes, theologians and some philosophers would have argued about the meaning of cloning an adult mammal and the prospects for cloning humans, but the organized ethics movement that drove the 1997 debate, the ethics committees of professional societies that issued opinions, even the national commissions set up by the United States and Europe to advise world leaders about the wisdom of attempting to clone humans, would not have existed. There may have been a public debate, but it would hardly have been so clamorous. And it is unlikely that local and national governments would have seriously considered passing laws to prohibit human beings from being cloned. - Clone

In the world of Never Let Me Go we know the cloning breakthrough took place in 1952, but we don't know the circumstances that led to this. Perhaps the Nazis won WW2 and didn't see the need to let Catholics or Christians voice their opinion?

[–] lucianolvr 10 years ago

That's an interesting quote from "Clone". I never read that. I disagree with the final thought, however:

And it is unlikely that local and national governments would have seriously considered passing laws to prohibit human beings from being cloned. - Clone

because back in 1956 religion in general was much more powerful, and observed by the general population. So, Catholics would have been opposed, other Christian churches would have been opposed, and many people who were not religious would be opposed. I don't think that human cloning would easily unfold in the world of the past. It would have more luck doing that in the current environment, in my opinion.

Perhaps the Nazis won WW2 and didn't see the need to let Catholics or Christians voice their opinion?

Interesting thought! A fascist government is never alluded to in the film, but that is an interesting idea🇩🇪

Love me some Waltons

[–] bsy 10 years ago

Catholicism and christianity are no longer the standard for moral behavior. There would probably be some who would be opposed and others who would jump at the chance to live a long, long life at the expense of a clone.

[–] lucianolvr 10 years ago

Yes, interesting statement. I know that in today's world Catholicism and Christianity (or religion in general) is no longer the standard of high moral behavior. I think that's sad, because I think it should be. But religion seems to be dying in our age and time. Especially in a busy, overly scheduled high tech age, rules or guidelines to live by to make us hurt each other less and love each other more would come in handy. Then not making people into clones to feed off of would be a less grey decision.

Love me some Waltons

[–] greg-233 10 years ago

"Especially in a busy, overly scheduled high tech age, rules or guidelines to live by to make us hurt each other less and love each other more would come in handy."

The TV show Doctor Who provides all that! I've watched it for over 30 years.

The show even has some relevance to Never Let Me Go: Carey Mulligan and Andrew Garfield have made appearances in Doctor Who. Garfield was in an episode in which the Daleks had arrived in 1930s New York. Mulligan was in an episode in which she was menaced by predatory "angels".

[–] peacefrog222-2 10 years ago

Hello fellow Whovian! My first thought watching this was hey, both of them were in Doctor Who! That show is so good, on so many levels.

[–] greg-233 10 years ago

"My first thought watching this was hey, both of them were in Doctor Who! That show is so good, on so many levels."

In Britain it's very prestigious to make an appearance in Doctor Who. It always looks good on an actor's resume.

[–] diane-bernaerts 10 years ago

....Catholicism and Christianity (or religion in general) is no longer the standard of high moral behavior. I think that's sad, because I think it should be. But religion seems to be dying in our age and time. ..... rules or guidelines to live by to make us hurt each other less and love each other more would come in handy.

Well, Catholicism and the rules and guidelines of the Catholic Church were very much the "standard" in the Middle Ages. Were people (and especially the so-called "heretics") really better off then? ;)

[–] kinshasaaaaa 9 years ago

If I may interject, I believe you've answered your own question by mentioning the Dark Ages.

[–] NotASpeckOfCereal 10 years ago

I found it interesting that the world in which this story takes place offers no organized protest to the whole cloning idea.

You don't know that. You certainly d=on't see it, but the entire film is shown from the POV of the clones, so you really don't know.

The story is about them, in a worlds where at least in some parts of the UK, cloning is acceptable.

Also, you'll note that the schools were closing, so it could be a part of society outside of their world was working against the whole thing.

But that's not what this film is about.

Be sure to proof your posts to see if you any words out

[–] alexander-978-692186 9 years ago

I clearly remember a nun was a doctor. But then again Catholics won't bury the dead if they aren't baptized, so maybe the clones weren't either.

[–] tbradydvm 9 years ago

I find it interesting that it's hard to believe that a religious doctrine who has a central theme of unquestioning sacrifice of the mortal body for the greater good could never evolve to accept this sort of system.

Also, religion aside, desperate people who want to stave off death who are kept socially isolated from the donors (whom they believe are not even human anyway)…I have no trouble envisioning a world where this could be seen as okay. History has many examples of far worse things done to "inhuman" groups of people by the majority for the "greater good".

[–] schwatime 9 years ago

In our world, the Catholics would have center stage in opposing the practice of human cloning for any purpose,

You don't know that. After all, the Church doesn't give a rat's hindquarters about the ill effects of overpopulation.

Also, even if the Church had, in that world, come out against the practice of cloning for organ harvesting, there's no good reason to believe that people would obey. Catholics pretty much do what they'd do if they weren't believers. See, for example, Church members' reaction to the contraception stance.

[–] morganseer 9 years ago

In our world, the Catholics would have center stage in opposing the practice of human cloning for any purpose, and I'm sure many other Christian orders would follow suit.
----------------------
Catholics and other Christians, like the rest of the population, do what they perceive is in their best interest. Hence the Vatican support of the Nazis, the Calvinist Swiss getting rich off confiscated Jewish property, etc. Idealism gets pushed into the background.