In “Never Let Me Go” by Kazuo Ishiguro we see cloned human beings that are raised in a boarding school so that they can grow up and become organ donors. The main purpose of these kids was growing up and donating their organs one by one till they finally die at an early age. These kids were not treated as human beings. They were created in a test tube just to be a donor. The main character who was also a donor is the narrator of this story. Life should be controlled by the person that owns it and that person should make decisions how to live and where to live, clones are still human beings with soul and flesh there for they deserve human right. If they cannot get the right they deserve then cloning should be illegal unless there is understandable reason. These kids are raised in a place called hailsham, where they are taken care of so that they can stay healthy but they were not allowed to leave the school and socialize with the world till they turn eighteen and graduate.
If clones are the exact copy of their originals then they are humans because saying that clones are not human’s means denying that their originals are humans because they are the same. Clones should have the same human rights as their original and the freedom to make their own decision. The clones kids in the movie were not counted as a human being and this particular school, halisham was a school opened trying to prove the world that these kids are like human beings and carry a soul but everybody including the kids accepted their purpose in life and nobody seems to fight or try to change the fact that they have to die for others life. These three kids were no different from regular teenagers. They have emotions, they can fall in love, they get sad, annoyed, ma...
... middle of paper ...
...hat is going to be saved is important, the clones are as important also. People die every day so instead of taking the rights of the people that are alive, it is better to take the right of the ones that are already dead and use their organs to save people. If using dead people’s organ is not enough then we can work on creating artificial organs that will work like the original one because cloning for donation is not an option.
Works Cited
"Genesis 1:27." The New Testament in Four Versions: King James, Revised Standard, Phillips Modern English, New English Bible. Washington: Christianity Today, 1963. N. pag. Print.
"Human Cloning and Human Dignity: An Ethical Inquiry." The President's Council on Bioethics Washington, D.C. N.p., July-Aug. 2002. Web.
Rosen, Gary. "What Would A Clone Say?" The New York Times. The New York Times, 26 Nov. 2005. Web. 18 Feb. 2014.
Although clones would be genetically identical to their original, it doesn't mean that they will
Coogan, Michael David., Marc Zvi. Brettler, Carol A. Newsom, and Pheme Perkins. "Genesis." The New Oxford Annotated Bible: With the Apocrypha. New York: Oxford UP, 2010. Print.
Children grow up watching movies such as Star Wars as well as Gattaca that contain the idea of cloning which usually depicts that society is on the brink of war or something awful is in the midsts but, with todays technology the sci-fi nature of cloning is actually possible. The science of cloning obligates the scientific community to boil the subject down into the basic category of morality pertaining towards cloning both humans as well as animals. While therapeutic cloning does have its moral disagreements towards the use of using the stem cells of humans to medically benefit those with “incomplete” sets of DNA, the benefits of therapeutic cloning outweigh the disagreements indubitably due to the fact that it extends the quality of life for humans.
“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.
In this case, this will be the beginning of human degradation because clones will be treated as commodities or purchased products. Although couples commonly have babies for purposes such as improving a marriage or continuing a family name, human clones can possibly serve as savior siblings or replacements. Savior siblings will only function as spare parts, while a replacement child stands in a shadow of their deceased clone. They represent means to an end by being forced into existence for a sole purpose to alleviate pain and misery from the preexisting. In my opinion, reproductive cloning will turn into a game for the countless number of egotistical people that our society obtains. As irrational as this may be, human cells will eventually be sold, so other people can produce babies that resemble past legends, or current superstars, and even dead geniuses. From the article by Philip Kitcher in the Science, Ethics, and Public Policy of Human Cloning book, the author recognized how prevalent cloning will become when commenters ventured how legitimate it would be to clone Einstein. He indicated, “Polls showed that Mother Teresa was the most popular choice for person-to-be-cloned, although a film star (Michelle Pfeiffer) was not far behind, and Bill and Hilary Clinton obtained some support〖."〗^7The quote signifies how cloning will eventually convert into a luxury to please peoples’ irrational means, increasing the chances for people to be equated to their genetic determinism. Kant identifies humans as authors to the moral law because of our possession of human dignity. According to Devolder’s article, “UNESCO's Universal
In conclusion, it is clear to see that cloning is not the taboo it has been made out to be. It is a new boundary that humanity has never encountered before and so it is understandable that people have qualms about ‘playing God’ by shaping a life. Although some might argue that it is immoral to clone human beings, the truth is that it is unethical not to. Given that such technology has the potential to save millions upon millions of lives, not tapping into that industry would have dire consequences on the future. In this case, the ends more certainly justify the means.
Brannigan, C. Michael. Ethical Issues in Human Cloning. New York: Seven Bridges Press, Chatham House Publishers, 2001.
As the first book of the Old Testament convey, Genesis, and its Greek meaning “in the beginning,” life originated with God in the Garden of Eden. Accor...
Cloning is defined as the process of asexually producing a group of cells, all genetically identical, from a single ancestor (College Library, 2006).” Cloning should be banned all around the world for many reasons, including the risks to the thing that is being cloned, cloning reduces genetic differences and finally it is not ethical. Almost every clone has mysteriously died even before they are born.
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.
Some who oppose the idea that the clones are human because they have a desire to have sex, would claim that they are not human because they cannot reproduce. Yes this ture the clones cannot reproduce, but there are also humans in the real world who cannot reproduce, so they depend on other methods like adoption. Humans who cannot reproduce still desires sex, like the clones in the novel that desire sex but cannot reproduce. This idea and the fact that there are real humans who can relate helps prove their humanity and not deny it like some may think.
Human cloning is dangerous. It is estimated that between 95 and 98 percent of cloning experiments have failed (Genetics and Society). These downfalls to cloning are in the form of miscarriages and stillbirths (Genetics and Society). Cloned human beings also run the risk of having severe genetic abnormalities. Children cloned from adult DNA would, in a sense, already have “old” genes. These children’s main problem would be developing and growing old too quickly. This includes arthritis, appearance, and organ function. Since the chance of having a child with mental and physical problems is so much higher than that of a normally conceived child, cloning should be illegal.
Robinson, Bruce. “Human Cloning: Comments by political groups, religious authorities, and individuals.” 3 August 2001. Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance. 1 October 2001 <http://www.religioustolerance.org/clo_reac.htm>.
A clone is a genetic replica of a cell, plant, and animal. One may ask what the controversy on this topic is or why is this topic important? The supporters of cloning see many reasons to continue and develop this form of creating children. Supporters believe everyone should have the right to have a child and cloning will help with certain conditions requiring transplants or rid humans of certain diseases. Arguments against the process of cloning believe the process is dangerous and that morally we should not create individuals with the same genetic material as another. In relation, John Stuart Mills believed in utilitarianism which overall is happiness for the greatest number of people based on utility. With Mills’ ideals of utility or the greatest happiness principle, I will argue in support for cloning.
Kazuo Ishiguro’s critically acclaimed 2005 Novel Never Let Me Go was influenced by cloning and stem cell research in the late 20th century. Many ethical discussions were raised, and Ishiguro displayed his perspective from his about clones that demonstrate the human experience to the core. The story was adapted into a film by the same name in 2010, directed by Mark Romanek. The novel explores plot, setting, character, literary techniques and themes by telling the story of cloned organ donors, forced to die for the good of humanity, all of which are well represented in the film adaptation.