Cloning is a subject which many people do not agree upon. Scientists think cloning should be allowed because it can lead to great things. On the other hand, those who are more religious argue that cloning should not be allowed because it violates the Bible and God’s plan. Though cloning may be seen as a violation of human and religious rights, cloning should be allowed because it can be very beneficial to humans, whether it would be through bringing a loved one back or helping lead to a medical breakthrough. Cloning should be allowed because it can help benefit the human race.
One of the main reasons cloning should be allowed is because cloning, for some people, is an ethical way to reproduce. Also, for some people cloning can be their only way to reproduce. Some people may not even be able to have children because they are infertile. Alun Anderson, editor of the science magazine New Scientist and former research biologist, discussed the possible advantages of cloning in one of his articles.
How about the case of a woman who desperately wishes to have a child but finds herself infertile? Current choices are limited and already involve complicated medical procedures. The woman might be able to obtain an egg from a donor, have it fertilized in vitro with sperm from her partner and then implanted in her womb. The child’s genetic makeup would be half that of another woman. Isn’t it kinder—perhaps even more natural—alternative to allow the woman to give birth to a clone of herself? (Anderson 60)
Also, some people may have a disability or even a disease that they would not want to pass on to their children. Anderson goes on to comment.
Take the case of a couple who have been to a genetic counselor and have found that they...
... middle of paper ...
...Cloning should be allowed because it can help all of humanity and can lead to lots of good in medical research.
Works Cited
Anderson, Alun. “Cloning Can Be an Ethical Form of Human Reproduction.” Cloning. Ed. Paul A. Winters. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 1998. 58-60. Print.
Barchfield, Jenny. "Brazil Looks to Cloning to Help Save Wild Species." Sarasota Herald-Tribune. 02 Dec. 2012: p. A.6. SIRS Issues Researcher. Web. 13 Jan. 2014.
Healy, Melissa. "Stem Cells Are Made by Cloning Method." Los Angeles Times. 16 May. 2013: p. A.1. SIRS Issues Researcher. Web. 13 Jan. 2014.
"H.R. 2505 - Human Cloning Prohibition Act of 2001, 07/30/2001." The White House. The White House, 30 July 2001. Web. 17 Jan. 2014.
Wilmut, Ian. Interview by Andrew Ross. Salon.com. 24 Feb. 1997. Cloning. Ed. Paul A Winters. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 1998. 49-53. Print.
“Why Human Cloning Must Be Banned Now.” Cbhd. Trinity International University, 4 June 2002. Web. 31 March 2014.
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.
Brannigan, C. Michael. Ethical Issues in Human Cloning. New York: Seven Bridges Press, Chatham House Publishers, 2001.
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.
A growing controversy in the world today is cloning. One stance is that cloning and cloning research should be banned altogether. Another position is in support of no restrictions of cloning and that scientists should be able to test on animals if they deem it necessary. Many other views are squeezed into different gray areas on the topic. It would be beneficial to explore the methods, benefits, moral and ethical conflicts involved with human cloning to fully understand the pros of cloning. The methods of human cloning and the research that accompanies them can provide a great deal of benefits. The benefits of human cloning include important medical breakthroughs, reproduction, and morality issues.
... 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
In conclusion, I think that reproductive cloning should not be legalized because it will bring new social, moral and economic problems. It ultimately objects human dignity, threatens the survival of humanity and individuality, and goes against humans playing God. Sevanthinathan says that reproductive cloning is powerful and has some advantages and disadvantages. One of the main disadvantages which Nordgren claims is that in the ethical presupposition, abnormalities may cause suffering to the cloned being, which is entirely unethical. On the other hand, Van den Berg, M.E.S says that to be sure that reproductive cloning is safe, cloning needs to be tested on humans, but it contradicts all factors that would even in the slightest support the idea of reproductive cloning.
According to Richard Dawkins “Cloning may be good and it may be bad. Probably it's a bit of both. The question must not be greeted with reflex hysteria but decided quietly, soberly and on its own merits. We need less emotion and more thought” (Dawkins, 2011). Cloning is a general term used to describe the replication of biological material (Cloning Fact Sheet, 2009). Throughout this paper the reasoning behind why cloning is an acceptable and potentially life changing science will be examined. Along with this we will take a close look at the arguments against cloning and exploring the flaws within the argument. This will affirm that cloning is useful because it cures diseases, passes on genes, and repopulates endangered species.
Badertscher, Eric. “Counterpart: The Problem of Cloning.” Points of View: Cloning (2013): 4. Points of View Reference Center. Web. 21 Nov. 2013.
Before the ethics of human cloning can be discussed, the mechanics of cloning must be understood first. Cloning is the process of making an exact genetic copy of an organism by a method called nuclear transplantation which is a process of removing a nucleus (the center of a cell which contains all of the biological information) from a cell and placing it into an already fertilized egg that had its nucleus removed (Dudley 6). That process creates an embryo which then can be “grown” in a lab or inside of a surrogate mother. However the process is not as easy as it sounds because the cells of an adult organism have mostly specialized to do a certain task. The cell specializes by turning “off” certain genes (sections of DNA that code for proteins) and when this specialized cell is transplanted into an egg, it is expected to turn into a whole new organism but with the same genetic makeup as the “donor” of the nucleus. That poses a problem because the specialized cell would not have all the necessary genes turned “on” for a new organism to create all the diverse organs and tissues that a new organism needs so there would be many failures before a functional and healthy clone is produced (Nusslein-Volhard). Even the first genetically cloned sheep named Dolly took 277 failures before it was actually created. If that was applied t...
Cloning and further scientific research into cloning should continue because it can lead to amazing advancements in the field of science. The word cloning has a negative connotation due to the media of today giving negative emotional reactions based off inaccurate science fiction. As humans, it is natural to fear the unknown and unusual, but when we let this fear control us we are deprived of the infinite possibilities to the betterment of humanity.
People should be aware on the negatives of cloning, it’s unethical, very risky, and irreligious...in my eyes just plain wrong. In addition, cloning involves killing a great number of embryos. Therefore, out of many of animals that were cloned, very few have survived and the ones that have cant live on their own and have become dependant on scientists for everything down to oxygen.
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.
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.
John A. Robertson’s article “Human Cloning and the Challenge of Regulation” raises three important reasons on why there shouldn’t be a ban on Human Cloning but that it should be regulated. Couples who are infertile might choose to clone one of the partners instead of using sperm, eggs, or embryo’s from anonymous donors. In conventional in vitro fertilization, doctors attempt to start with many ova, fertilize each with sperm and implant all of them in the woman's womb in the hope that one will result in pregnancy. (Robertson) But some women can only supply a single egg. Through the use of embryo cloning, that egg might be divisible into, say 8 zygotes for implanting. The chance of those women becoming pregnant would be much greater. (Kassirer) Secondly, it would benefit a couple at high risk of having offspring with a genetic disease choose weather to risk the birth of an affected child. (Robertson) Parents who are known to be at risk of passing a genetic defect to a child could make use of cloning. A fertilized ovum could be cloned, and the duplicate tested for the disease or disorder. If the clone were free of genetic defects, then the other clone would be as well. Then this could be implanted in the woman and allowed to mature to term. (Heyd) Thirdly, it would be used to obtain tissue or organs...