"Everybody who thought it would proceed slowly and could be stopped was wrong," said Lee Silver, a professor from the University of Princeton. Without proper research to support the ban, the premature ban should be reconsidered and appealed. Cloning could provide a way for infertile couples to produce children genetically similar to themselves, a method of creating spare organs for transplants, and a cure for genetic disease. Human cloning may provide numerous benefits to mankind and should not be banned. Some people say that it is morally wrong and others are scared that a leader, such as Sadam Husian, will clone himself.
(Freudenrich, Ph.D., Craig, 1) Cloning in our society would help avoid the risks of Down Syndrome, Tay-Sachs disease, and even cancer. In Brave New World, none of the citizens in the World State have any diseases; they die from old age. America would likely support cloning for this idea, since we have vocalized our thoughts on finding a cure and ending these diseases. Advocates of cloning also argue that cloning would help in the issue of infertility. Many couples who are incapable of having their own baby and want their baby to have their genes could use cloning as the solution.
While embryonic cloning is a possibility, we already possess the capabilities to clone so cloning is an invalid argument. The final argument against embryonic stem cell research is that there are alternatives, like adult stem cells. While adult stem cells may be utilized, they won’t be as effective. Embryonic stem cells are not only efficient but also renewable. They can be grown in a culture where as adult stem cells are extremely rare, if there are any.
If this bill were to pass then the scientific community will have a huge blow dealt against it. Human cloning techniques should not be completely banned because they have the potential of revealing new ways to cure currently incurable diseases and ailments. In the article ?Human Cloning is good for All of Us,? Patrick Stephens writes that ?regulations will delay the availability of medical technologies that cloning and genetic research are bound to bring.? Even though Stephens presents a true possibility he only sees one side of the argument and fails to examine what unchecked cloning could result in.
It is completely unnecessary for scientists to create embryos to merely destroy; however, I fail to see the problem in using embryos destine for destruction for a greater good. These embryos have already be robbed of their life, so by being used for research they provide others with the blessing of a wonderful and healthy life. By federally funding research done on embryos, the society will not be continuing in the way of the complete degradation of society. The American people will benefit through the improvement of their health and the vast knowledge that they will acquire about their bodies and the way they work. Works Cited 1.Miller, John J.
Cloning could also lead to a better treatment for heart attacks. According to the Human Cloning Foundation, doctors will be able to treat heart attack victims by cloning their healthy heart cells and injecting them into the areas of the heart that have been damaged (HumanCloning.Org). Heart disease is the number one killer in the United States and several other industrialized countries.
The stake over the issue of stem cells revolves around the human life itself. Proponents of stem cells say that until an embryo has not been embedded into the uterus, it does not have a human status and therefore could be used to treat patient who already are persons. They also propose to obtain cells through IVF as opposed to abortion because abortion is attributed to a deliberate act of killing human life while the fo... ... middle of paper ... ...of optimism and bring forth a new way of life and medical abilities all around the world for the benefit of people, family, friends, and oneself. Science can be described as the pursuit of innovation, advancement and opportunity. Stem cells have offered scientists and the world a new doorway to treat diseases and help millions.
Other applications seem clearly beneficial: the cloning of stem cells allows medical researchers a powerful, cost-effective, suffering-free alternative to animal testing. However, if most applications of the technology are undesirable and none are highly advantageous, society might do well to ban the technology entirely and keep a lid on Pandora's box. This may well be the case. While the cloning of stem cells is beneficial - because it does not entail the creation of new persons - it is not "reproductive cloning." We might therefore take the route adopted by several countries and ban reproductive cloning while allowing the cloning of stem cells for medical research.
I have complete understanding of embryonic stem cell research, and its potential to end human suffering, however it is unethical to do so. First and foremost, embryonic stem cells have the potential for life. Using stem cells for research shows a lack of consensus regarding the meaning, bonds, and sense of life. Knowing we can does not mean we should. There are limits and using embryonic stem cells for research purposes requires the destruction of the human embryo, and putting an end to potential human life crosses the line.
In the novel “Never Let Me Go” by Kazuo Ishiguro society has found a way to surpass this issue and make organ transplantations successful without causing harm to the patient. “Your lives are set out for you… before you’re middle aged you will start donating vital organs. That’s what each of you was created to do.”(Ishiguro, 81). In the novel, the problem is resolved through the use of human clones which provide donor organs to compensate for the supply and demand ratio, which also solves issues of compatibility as now there will be a wider selection of compatible organs for use. However, cloning of humans is strictly forbidden; the clones are also human beings as they have dreams and aspirations harvesting organs from human clones would be no different that killing another human being.