In 1997, a group of Scottish scientists at the Roslin Institute successfully cloned a sheep, named “Dolly,” through a complicated process, called reproductive cloning (“Cloning Fact Sheet” 1). Since “Dolly’s” creation, scientists all over the world have been intrigued by the idea of possibly cloning a human being someday. This memorable event in history started a chain of experiments leading to an ongoing controversial question: Is reproductive cloning a useful technology that should be legalized, or an unethical experiment that should no longer be toyed with? Before researching this question, I would have answered it by simply saying that I am absolutely against the idea of cloning because as a Christian, I believe that the power to create humans and animals should be left in the hands of God; no one else. All I knew about cloning was that it meant reproducing an identical clone of a human or animal, but that trying to clone a human is illegal. I didn’t even know that the version of cloning I was thinking of was one of three specific types of cloning. However, now that I’ve gained an understanding of what reproductive cloning is exactly and what the pros and cons of this science are, I’ve discovered that there is more to this question, than just arguing against it without knowing what the progression of cloning could mean for the entire world. It is for this reason that I chose to write an inquiry essay on the issue of reproductive cloning.
Before taking a side on the science of reproductive cloning, it is necessary to analyze the word’s definition. As defined by the U.S. Department of Energy Genome Programs, reproductive cloning is “a technology used to generate an animal that has the same nuclear DNA as another currently or p...
... middle of paper ...
...to say.
Bibliography
"Cloning Fact Sheet." Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Web. 08 Feb.2011.
.
Kane, Francis. "Reproductive Technology Is Disturbing." Reproductive Technology. Ed. Cindy
Mur. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 2010. At Issue. Gale Opposing Viewpoints In Context.
Web. 8 Feb. 2011.
McLachlan, Hugh. "Human Cloning Should Be Legalized." New Scientist 195 (21 July 2007):
20. Rpt. in Genetic Engineering. Ed. Louise I. Gerdes. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 2005.
Opposing Viewpoints. Gale Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 8 Feb. 2011.
Pacelle, Wayne. "Animal Cloning Is Unethical." 2005. Rpt. in Cloning. Ed. Tamara L. Roleff.
San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 2006. Opposing Viewpoints. Gale Opposing Viewpoints In
Context. Web. 8 Feb. 2011.
Therapeutic cloning is the process whereby parts of a human body are grown independently from a body from STEM cells collected from embryos for the purpose of using these parts to replace dysfunctional ones in living humans. Therapeutic Cloning is an important contemporary issue as the technology required to conduct Therapeutic Cloning is coming, with cloning having been successfully conducted on Dolly the sheep. This process is controversial as in the process of collecting STEM cells from an embryo, the embryo will be killed. Many groups, institutions and religions see this as completely unacceptable, as they see the embryo as a human life. Whereas other groups believe that this is acceptable as they do not believe that the embryo is a human life, as well as the fact that this process will greatly benefit a large number of people. In this essay I will compare the view of Christianity who are against Therapeutic Cloning with Utilitarianism who are in favour of Therapeutic Cloning.
Understanding the facts as well as procedures between the many different types of cloning is very crucial. When everything boils down there are three types of cloning known as DNA cloning, therapeutic cloning and reproductive cloning. DNA cloning is the copying of a gene in order to transfer it into another organism which is usually used by farmers in most of their crops. Therapeutic cloning is the use of stem cells used to help take the place of whatever cell is missing which is potentially used to help the ill. Stem cells contain the potential to grow and help replace the genes that are missing in order to fix whatever is genetically wrong with your body or any genes that you may be missing. Reproductive cloning actually produces a living animal from only one parent. The endless possibilities and perhaps hidden motives of using genetic engineering are what divide as well as destroy the scientific community’s hope for passing laws that are towards pro cloning. Many people within soci...
“Cloning represents a very clear, powerful, and immediate example in which we are in danger of turning procreation into manufacture.” (Kass) The concept of cloning continues to evoke debate, raising extensive ethical and moral controversy. As humans delve into the fields of science and technology, cloning, although once considered infeasible, could now become a reality. Although many see this advancement as the perfect solution to our modern dilemmas, from offering a potential cure for cancer, AIDS, and other irremediable diseases, its effects are easily forgotten. Cloning, especially when concerning humans, is not the direction we must pursue in enhancing our lives. It is impossible for us to predict its effects, it exhausts monetary funds, and it harshly abases humanity.
Cloning is the creation of an organism that is an exact genetic copy of another. Every single bit of DNA is the same. There are three different types of cloning. Gene cloning produces copies of genes or fragments of DNA, reproductive cloning creates copies of whole animals, and therapeutic cloning builds embryonic stem cells for experiments aimed at creating tissues to replace injured or diseased tissues. In 1997 scientists in Scotland announced the birth of a clone. Its name was Dolly; after the American country singer. She was the clone of an adult female sheep, and the first mammal to ever be cloned successfully. As Dolly matured, she mated with a ram, and gave birth to a lamb showing that clones have the ability to reproduce. Dolly died at the age of six. According to Sheep 101, the life expectancy for a sheep is 10-12 years, but some sheep can live up to 20 years.
In the past, cloning always seemed like a faraway scientific fantasy that could never really happen, but sometimes reality catches up to human ingenuity and people discover that a fictional science is all too real. Such was the fate of cloning when Dolly, a cloned sheep, came into existence during 1997, as Beth Baker explains (Baker 45). In addition to opening the eyes of millions of people, the breakthrough raised many questions about the morality of cloning humans. The greatest moral question is, when considering the pros against the cons, if human cloning is an ethical practice. There are two different types of cloning and both entail completely different processes and both are completely justifiable at the end of the day.
The matter of human reproductive cloning is a complex topic, in which there are many issues that must be addressed before any actions take place. Any decision based on reproductive cloning will not be clear-cut, and instead will host a multitude of ideas. In this paper, I will determine, through philosophical thinking, if human reproductive cloning is morally appropriate.
Cloning is, and always has been an extremely contentious topic. To some, the ethical complications surrounding it, are far more promiscuous than what scientists and medical experts currently acknowledge. Cloning is a general term that refers to the process in which an organism, or discrete cells and genes, undergo genetic duplication, in order to produce an identical copy of the original biological matter. There are two main types of artificial cloning; reproductive and therapeutic, both of which present their respective benefits and constraints. This essay aims to discuss the various differences between the two processes, as well as the ethical issues associated with it.
Since 1885, there have been a number of researchers, scientists, geneticists, reproductive technologists and embryologists, such as August Weismann, Hans Spemann, Walter Sutton, Paul Berg, Steen Willadsen, et al., who have contributed much to the research and development of our current concepts of cloning. Particularly two of the more recent renowned contributors to cloning research and experimentation are Ian Wilmut, a Ph. D. in animal genetic engineering, and Richard Seed, who founded Fertility and Genetics in the 1980s.
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.
In the essay, Cloning Reality: Brave New World by Wesley J. Smith, a skewed view of the effects of cloning is presented. Wesley feels that cloning will end the perception of human life as sacred and ruin the great diversity that exists today. He feels that cloning may in fact, end human society as we know it, and create a horrible place where humans are simply a resource. I disagree with Wesley because I think that the positive effects of controlled human cloning can greatly improve the quality of life for humans today, and that these benefits far outweigh the potential drawbacks that could occur if cloning was misused.
Cloning has become a major issue in our modern world, from moral, ethical, and religious concerns, to the problem of financial and government support. Human cloning is one of the most controversial topics, and because of this, many of the new important discoveries and beneficial technologies have been overlooked and ignored. Reproductive cloning technology may offer many new possibilities, including hope for endangered species, resources for human organ transplants, and answers to questions concerning cancer, inherited diseases, and aging. The research that led up to the ability to clone mammals started more than a century ago. From frogs to mice to sheep to humans, reproductive cloning promises many possibilities.
In recent years, the development of cloning technology in non-human species has led to new ways of producing medicine and improving our understanding of development and genetics. But what exactly is human reproductive cloning and how has this technology been developed? The term “cloning” refers more specifically to a process known as somatic cell nuclear transfer. In this process, the DNA from the cell of ...
In recent years our world has undergone many changes and advancements, cloning is a primary example of this new modernism. On July 5th, 1995, Dolly, the first cloned animal, was created. She was cloned from a six-year-old sheep, making her cells genetically six years old at her creation. However, scientists were amazed to see Dolly live for another six years, until she died early 2005 from a common lung disease found in sheep. This discovery sparked a curiosity for cloning all over the world, however, mankind must answer a question, should cloning be allowed? To answer this question some issues need to be explored. Is cloning morally correct, is it a reliable way to produce life, and should human experimentation be allowed?
In the article that I chose there are two opposing viewpoints on the issue of “Should Human Cloning Ever Be Permitted?” John A. Robertson is an attorney who argues that there are many potential benefits of cloning and that a ban on privately funded cloning research is unjustified and that this type of research should only be regulated. On the flip side of this issue Attorney and medical ethicist George J. Annas argues that cloning devalues people by depriving them of their uniqueness and that a ban should be implemented upon it. Both express valid points and I will critique the articles to better understand their points.
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.