The purpose of this year's study is to determine what effects does human cloning have on society and how people react to human cloning. The most commonly cited ethical and moral arguments against human cloning seem to originate from religious perspectives. These religious arguments can even be made by politicians and scientists with religious sympathies. Many religious philosophies teach, for example, that human life is unique and special and should be created, determined and controlled only by their deities. Many religions believe in the existence of, and in the individuality of, a human soul. Many Christians, for example, will be concerned about whether it will be possible to clone the human soul, along with the human. If it is possible to clone the soul, what will this "mean"? In contrast, if a person is cloned, but not their soul, what will this "mean"? Can a clone without a soul be destroyed and not offend moral or religious beliefs? Cloning will be divined by many as humans assuming the powers, the providence, and the jurisdiction their deities or other spiritual powers of their supernatural universe. (Watson 98)
Cloning is the production of a human or animal part that is genetically identical to the original. The cloning of cells from human embroyos is a specific process using stem cells, the very earliest forms of cells, which later develop into the 216 different cells that make up adult humans.
At this early stage, these embryonic cells are flexible and could potentially be used to create any kind of human cell - hence their value to the scientific community. If the nucleus, the control centre of an adult cell, is transplanted into one of these stem cells, it could produ...
... middle of paper ...
...ical burdens of additional hyperstimulated cycles and surgical retrieval. Cloning embryos in these ways would produce one or more embryos with the same genome (although mitochondrial DNA will differ, except in the case of embryo splitting). If they were placed in the uterus at the same time, they might produce two or more offspring with the same genome, resulting in the novelty of deliberately created twins. More problematic situations arise if a child is born from the first transfer, and the couple later thaws and transfers the other cloned embryos in order to have additional children. The result could be one or more children born at different points in time with the same genome. (Why Files 97)
Based on the above literature the researcher hypothesizes that the majority of people will belive that human cloning should not be allowed, and not to be tampered with.
The objective of this essay is to inform the reader(s) about human cloning. I believe that human cloning is morally wrong because one should not have the right to avoid daily responsibilities by getting someone else to handle them. There will be four sections of this paper that will be discussed. Firstly, there is an argumentative section, which will have premises along with a conclusion for an argument made against human cloning. Secondly, an explanation section, which explains how the argument against human cloning obeys the rules for a good argument. Thirdly, an objection section to where there are arguments that violates mine in order to demonstrate how objectors might object to the argument. Lastly, there will be a conclusion where I discuss
Cloning is a real process that scientists use today to reproduce an exact living copy of DNA from the DNA of another living organism. When the idea of cloning first came about in the early 1800’s people believed it to be more science fiction than actual science. People didn’t understand the concept of cloning and therefore was naturally scared of the subject. It is best understood by how the Department of Animal Sciences at Cornell University explains it, “Cloning is a method of producing two or more genetically identical organisms by asexual reproduction. This means that there is only one parent cell, from which all the genetic information will come. Thus, the DNA sequence of cloned organisms is exactly the same as that of the parent cell.” Despite the general population’s disbelief there have been major scientific advances in the cloning process in the last fifty years. After many years of trial and error the first successful clone was created.
...w, the media has framed the cloning debate as an ethical debate and has provided the framework that much of the public views the issue. Among the articles that I reviewed, the main characterization of cloning as an ethical issue centers around two connected worries: the loss of individuality, the motivations behind cloning. In the presentation cloning the media has not always presented an objective view of cloning, but rather has played upon peoples fears about loss of individuality and questionable use of cloning to create uncertainty among the public.
It is essential that human cloning is outlawed. It is salacious to perform, research, and promote these experiments on human subjects; it is neglectful, and shrewd to make the presence of this objective technology legal, let alone obtainable. Not only is human cloning hazardous and illogical, but morally incorrect and greatly dishonorable. The most alarming thought referring to human cloning is that it has the power to alter the foundation, that we as a nation, are assembled upon. What occurs after we take things too far and lose control? What happens when we are no more satisfied in simply seeking education of the physical universe? We will cross the line between natural and synthetic. What will differentiate God from man? Do we have the authorization to change the evolution of life? Science has proven that we can reproduce humans both naturally and unnaturally, but that does not mean that mean we should stop questioning whether or not we should scientifically reproduce humans.
“Why Human Cloning Must Be Banned Now.” Cbhd. Trinity International University, 4 June 2002. Web. 31 March 2014.
There are some rewards and disadvantages to utilizing human reproductive cloning. One advantage would be giving a woman who was not able to find the right person to have a child with, the child she had wanted. In “Mothers by Choice” there are many professional women, who before, would have to settle with ”Mr. Okay” to have a child (Munson 335). Now, marriage is not necessary to allow working women a child and they would not have to settle or put their ambitions to the wayside.
Imagine a world where everyone looked like you and was related to you as a sibling, cousin, or any form of relation, wouldn’t that be freaky? Although cloning is not an important issue presently, it could potentially replace sexual reproduction as our method of producing children. Cloning is a dangerous possibility because it could lead to an over-emphasis on the importance of the genotype, no guaranteed live births, and present risks to both the cloned child and surrogate mother. It also violates the biological parent-child relationship and can cause the destruction of the normal structure of a family. The cloning of the deceased is another problem with cloning because it displays the inability of the parents to accept the child’s death and does not ensure a successful procedure. Along with the risks, there are benefits to Human Reproductive Cloning. It allows couples who cannot have a baby otherwise to enjoy parenthood and have a child who is directly related to them. It also limits the risk of transmitting genetic diseases to the cloned child and the risk of genetic defects in the cloned child. Although the government has banned Human Reproductive Cloning, the issue will eventually come to the surface and force us to consider the 1st commandment of God, all men are equal in the eyes of god, but does this also include clones? That is the question that we must answer in the near future in order to resolve a controversy that has plagued us for many years.
Although the issue of human cloning has received the most attention within the last two years, cloning techniques have existed since the late 1970s. The cloning technique used at this time was a process called artificial twinning which involved split ting a single fertilized ovum into what are then considered new embryos and then implanting each into a female to be carried to term (religioustolerance.org 1). These experiments, however, were limited to animals. By the 1980s and early 1990s, during the presidencies of Ronald Reagan and George Bush, restrictions had been placed on the research of the cloning of human beings. The pro-life groups, which have considerabl e influence in the Republican party, held many concerns about the experimentation and destruction of human embryos, which they consider people with rights, thus they pressured the administration for restrictions on research (cac.psu.edu 1). A series of measures prohibiting federal funding for human cloning were thus implement...
I think that human cloning shouldn’t be controversial because it’s giving people a second chance to either live longer or become parents for the first time. I think it’ll be very useful in the future and besides its not hurting anyone. To some people they might not think it’s a good idea because of the different features it might have but then again its being used for good. Human cloning sounds weird, but I think it’s interesting to know that animals and human can be cloned. I would like to learn more, that’s one reason why I decided to write about this topic. Human cloning as positive things to it even if there are side effects to this issue but it’s not harming anyone its helping the world.
Cloning, a topic that has recently caused mayhem all over the world, is possible, but will it be here to stay? The astonishing news that scientists had cloned a sheep a couple of years ago sent people into panic at the thought that humans might be next. "Cloning is a radical challenge to the most fundamental laws of biology, so it's not unreasonable to be concerned that it might threaten human society and dignity" (Macklin 64). Since most of the opposition is coming from the pure disgust of actually being able to clone species, it makes it difficult for people to get away from the emotional side of the issue and analyze the major implications cloning would have for society. To better understand this controversial issue, the pros and cons of cloning will be discussed.
... always be a topic of controversy no matter how much evidence you supply to support each side. Cloning in America and in the world has the chance to enhance our culture and enrich our society
When people think of the word cloning they think of evil scientist in a dark laboratory’s full of dangerous and scary instruments of science for conducting experiments, when actually the word clone means, “a cell, cell product, or organism that is genetically identical to the unit or individual from which it was derived (Dictionary.com).” In the past 50 years the science community has made many discoveries such as the cures for different life threatening diseases, different techniques of approaching different types of cancer, and different uses for the practice of cloning. Different people have many opinions about cloning. Some people in the medical field support the practice of cloning, because they believe it can help cure certain diseases by watching how they develop during the cloning process. But some people in the medical field do not support the practice of cloning, because they feel as if it is just a waste of time, and waste of money. Other people do not support the practice of cloning for religious reasons; because they feel as if things are suppose to live once and if a once living organism is artificially reproduced then it is defying the divine grace of God.
It is normal to think cloning is something out of a science fiction orb. For many years, scientists have been telling the world that it’s impossible to clone humans, but they were all wrong. The technology of cloning humans is already here, as evidenced by Dolly the sheep, but it called forth questions about the role of God in society, the soul and even the quality of life a cloned individual would have (“16 important pros and cons”). Cloning technologies can prove helpful to researchers in genetics. With the history of cloning, one difference to help in mind, with dealing with cloning, is the reproductive cloning or therapeutic cloning.
There are many opinions on the topic of cloning, particularly on the controversy of human cloning. Lots of people have many fears over if we should continue this form of study, whereas others think that this technology should be pushed forward with high hopes. However, no side should rule out the other, but instead, should compliment one another. Both arguments should be heard and acknowledged before any decision is made towards this new area of study. For example, many people think that their fears are unanswerable and should cause the absolute ban on cloning.
In recent years, many new breakthroughs in the areas of science and technology have been discovered. A lot of these discoveries have been beneficial to scientific community and to the people of the world. One of the newest breakthroughs is the ability to clone. Ever since Ian Wilmut and his co-workers completed the successful cloning of an adult sheep named Dolly, there has been an ongoing debate on whether it is right or wrong to continue the research of cloning (Burley). Recently, in February 2001, CNN conducted a poll that stated, 90% of American adults think that cloning humans is a bad idea (Robinson). Even though the majority of Americans are opposed to human cloning, there are many benefits that will come from the research of it. Advancements in the medical field and in the fertility process will arise from human cloning. These advancements make cloning very beneficial to the human society.