"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.
This, surely would be immensely beneficial to millions of unfortunate people around the world that are expected to lose their lives due to failure of single (or more) organ(s). It is also arguable that a ban on cloning may be unconstitutional and would deprive people of the right to reproduce and restrict the freedom of scientists. Arguments against cloning are also on a perfectly viable side. Primarily, I believe that cloning would intervene with the normal 'cycle' of life. There would be large number of identical genes, which minimizes the chances of mutation, and, in turn, evolution - the fundamental reason how living things naturally adapt to the ever-changing environment.
This may be a be... ... middle of paper ... ...mpowers scientists to eliminate disorders from the human genome and will soon allow parents to choose the traits and genetic factors of their children. However, the risks involved in genetic engineering of human genome are far too great. Genetic engineering is unnatural; but it is not bad. Until we have sufficient knowledge on the risks of genetic engineering, the risks to all the future descendants of the individuals outweigh the benefits to the small number of the individuals. The lack of knowledge should limit the advancement of genetic engineering.
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.
Another Chance of Life Can there be another you? The answer is no, but by human cloning you can reproduce an offspring that grows into an exact genetically double of you. All of us want to prolong the lives of our loved ones and have a healthy newborn baby. Many infertility couples wanted to have a baby that is genetically theirs, not from adopting a child from a different family background. In the cloning technology, eggs or sperms would not be needed to be conceived by a person because any cell would do.
Since PGD isn’t accepted by the Catholic Church and many other religions, it is completely forbidden is some countries. Chile, Switzerland, China, the I... ... middle of paper ... ...e to increase a human being’s live to 30 years—which I agree is good but only if necessary—. People think Designer babies is the future of our children because it could allows parents to choose what their children look like and what qualities they possess. There is a reason why humans shouldn’t be perfect, there is a reason God created us with flaws and making people perfect is just...wrong. Pre-implantation Genetic Diagnosis should be used only when it’s necessary, we shouldn’t design out babies, and we shouldn’t test on animals or crops because they can both be harmful.
No Thanks.” in which Hayes disagrees with Green, saying that genetic modification would no doubt lead to hand picked “designer” babies, which would destroy the free will and futures of children who were born into their destiny. Hayes' final point, saying that although it is a good thing to use genetic modification to eliminate diseases such and cancer and obesity, we shouldn't go any further than that when it comes to messing with the genes of unborn babies. Although both authors make some great points in their essays, Green definitely makes the stronger more persuasive argument than Hayes, who basically just gives his opinion without backing it up with anything. One of the main points mentioned in both articles is that genetic modification is very useful in the sense that it could help get rid of some of the most deadly diseases that plague humanity, like different types of cancer and Alzheimer’s. This can be done by going into the unborn fetus and basically just eliminating the gene that would cause it.
For years, researchers have been working on finding a way to cure genetic diseases and save lives by cloning genes and organs. I think that these medical advancements are very beneficial for human kind in general. I totally disagree with people who say that God made some of us different and we should not try to change them. It is like saying that people who got sick after they were born should not seek medical help because God wanted them to get sick and they should just lie down and die. I say that if it is for the better of that person and if it is going to help them lead a normal life then let them do it.
Another benefit in the field of fertility is that parents unable to conceive naturally, even with in vitro, or people too old to conceive, could still have a genetically related child (Masci 413-414). With cloning, egg and sperm would not be necessary for reproduction, because any body cell would work (Eibert). The resulting offspring would actually be a replica of one parent (Masci 413-414). Other benefits to using cloning come in the field of fighting disease. When genes are not in use, they become dormant.
In conclusion, America would only benefit from switching to the opt-out policy. Some people would be against this new policy but if they are, all they would have to do is request for their body to remain as is after they are deceased. By switching to this new policy America would save millions of lives and give those who are terminally ill a fighting chance. Reports of stolen body parts such as kidneys and corneas would go down significantly, and there would be no need to sell organs illegally through the red market.