Arguments Against Pet Cloning

529 Words2 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Cons of animal cloning

Pet Cloning
The debate on whether to clone pets or not has been on the rise internationally. Pet cloning is different from animal cloning. This is because pets attract emotional attachment to their owners hence the feud whether it is morally and practical to clone a pet. Pet cloning begun few years ago and many pet owners have found it an alternative to their loss. Autumn Feistier and Hillary Bok argue their different views about pet cloning.
In her argument for supporting pet cloning, Autumn Feistier insist that pet cloning is ethically and morally justified (Stephen, 132). She poses the idea that it is an ideal way to stretch the experience the owner of the pets has. Considering how expensive veterinary care is, cloning seems to be the ideal way to save money and have variety of the same pet. In her argument, Autumn believes that some pets are very valuable and hence it would be difficult to replace them with new pets. Also in consideration is how emotionally attached some pet …show more content…

A cloned pet can never be the same as the original because of different upbringing, environment and experiences. Trying to continue where you stopped with the dead pet may be hard for the owner and so a replica of the pet may only give solace to the grieving owner. Hillary says it’s immoral to clone pets and try to take advantage of grieving owners. Pet cloning also causes great harm to animals. The animal being cloned is more likely to have defects than the original animal. He argues that the whole process is harmful to animal and does not guarantee that the owners will get the same pet. Cloning animals for commercial benefit is better than pet cloning which is just used to give the owner some consolation. Companies that do pet cloning are accused of taking advantage of the pet owner’s grief. The originality and dignity of a pet can never be replaced so by cloning the pet you reduce

Show More
Related

  • Animal Cloning In Frankenstein's Cat

    831 Words  | 2 Pages

    Even though natural born animals present a higher survival rate, cloned sheep and cows show different results. Even if the cloned cows and sheep show a positive sign of survival, most of the cloned animals’ die either in the womb or after the clone exits the womb. (Anthes 63). Through this example, death dominates the choices of these cloned animals, and scientists continue the experiments for the benefits of humans. By focusing on human needs, the scientists pretend that animal welfare means absolutely nothing, but animals deserve safety just like humans. If scientists truly believe that cloning meets moral standards, than how come scientists cannot find a more effective way to decrease the failure rate of

    Read More

  • Therapuetic Cloning

    1296 Words  | 3 Pages

    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.

    Read More

  • The Opposition to Human Cloning: How Morality and Ethics Factor in

    2868 Words  | 6 Pages

    If a random individual were asked twenty years ago if he/she believed that science could clone an animal, most would have given a weird look and responded, “Are you kidding me?” However, that once crazy idea has now become a reality, and with this reality, has come debate after debate about the ethics and morality of cloning. Yet technology has not stopped with just the cloning of animals, but now many scientists are contemplating and are trying to find successful ways to clone human individuals. This idea of human cloning has fueled debate not just in the United States, but also with countries all over the world. I believe that it is not morally and ethically right to clone humans. Even though technology is constantly advancing, it is not reasonable to believe that human cloning is morally and ethically correct, due to the killing of human embryos, the unsafe process of cloning, and the resulting consequences of having deformed clones.

    Read More

  • Through the Looking Glass: The Case for Human Reproductive Cloning

    1976 Words  | 4 Pages

    In the summer of 1996, an animal unlike any other was born unto the world. Roughly three feet high and covered in an insulating material, there were countless others that looked nearly identical freely roaming the countryside. But this animal was special; it was precisely identical to one of its brethren. Dolly the sheep was the first ever manmade clone, an exact copy of its genetic donor. In the fifteen years since the birth of Dolly cloning technology has been improving at a steady pace, and now humanity as a whole is at an impasse: human clones. Scientists are very close to being able to clone a human being, but should they? A ban on human cloning issued by the World Health Organization is in place (World Health Organization 1) but it is non-binding in nature, and individual governments must come up with their own cloning policies. For the United States, the choice is obvious: the federal government should not place a ban on human reproductive cloning. There are numerous reasons for this, such as the notion of cloning as an alternative to adoption, the elimination of disease, the possibility of continuing life after death, and the possibility of an improved quality of life for the clones themselves. At the same time, there are arguments against human cloning, mostly centering on moral issues, that must also be addressed.

    Read More

  • The Pros And Cons Of Human Cloning

    1524 Words  | 4 Pages

    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

    Read More

  • The Injustice Of Cloning In Mary Shelley's Frankenstein

    954 Words  | 2 Pages

    In arguing against cloning, the central debate is derived from the fact that this unnatural process is simply unethical. The alleged

    Read More

  • The Pros And Cons Of Cloning

    860 Words  | 2 Pages

    Human and animal cloning is still a debatable issue. People believe that cloning is playing God, just as Victor Frankenstein did when he created the Monster. While Victor Frankenstein’s creation ended in catastrophe, cloning’s seemly innocent side effects can still disrupt and alter the entire world.

    Read More

  • Cloning In Mary Shelley's Frankenstein '

    1849 Words  | 4 Pages

    successful clones often have problems with their body and are subject to a short lifespan ridden with health problems. This hurts the person or animal cloned rather than to help them, making cloning an immoral

    Read More

  • Morality of Cloning

    1537 Words  | 4 Pages

    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.

    Read More

  • Ethical Ethics Of Cloning

    1782 Words  | 4 Pages

    Cloning has been a controversial topic since the time it was introduced, prompting questions of ethics. Although it has been unintentionally in use for thousands of years, it was first brought about in the 1960’s. As more and more discoveries have been gained since then, numerous uncertainties continue to be raised among scientists, politicians, and anyone interested in the issue. While the idea of cloning is intriguing and polarizing, there is a fine like that defines what is and isn’t ethical; it is moral to clone cells for research development and plants for agricultural desires, but it is in no way acceptable to clone humans and animals for reproductive reasons.

    Read More

  • The Cloning Debate

    1026 Words  | 3 Pages

    Not so far in the future, a young boy of the age of six, dying a heart-wrenching death, will only be able survive with a bone marrow transplant.  His parents will have searched near and far for a match, but none will come to their aid.  The only possible way that they can produce a perfect match for their son's bone marrow is to clone their son.  Unfortunately, at this time this topic is still being discussed and debated upon with the government.  Their only child that has been their treasure for six years might die.  A clone of their son becomes their apple of aspiration to keep the treasure from being buried.

    Read More

  • Cloning is Unethical

    802 Words  | 2 Pages

    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?

    Read More

  • The Pros And Cons Of Cloning

    929 Words  | 2 Pages

    ...cloning can be divided into two broad category: potential safety risk and moral problems, and these concerns overweigh its achievement.

    Read More

  • Reasons to Ban Cloning

    591 Words  | 2 Pages

    Secondly, “the most the human race has to loose by playing around with cloning is that the genetic diversity would be lost (Andrea Castro, 2005).” Reducing the genetic differences will produce clones that are grossly overlarge, many animals will be born with genetic mutations, and there will be a higher “risk of disease transfer (Saskaschools, 2003). “A review of all the world's cloned animals suggests that every one of them is genetically and physically defective (Leake, 2002).” Mutations will be passed on to the younger generation because if a cloned species has a mutation in their DNA this mutation will be passed on. Cloning has been linked with diseases of ageing, arthritis and, cancer.

    Read More

  • Human Cloning

    1801 Words  | 4 Pages

    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.

    Read More

More about Arguments Against Pet Cloning

Open Document