... ... middle of paper ... ...rts the use of stem cells. If there is no potential for the eggs to become human beings, then why not use them for the greater good? These could be used to save the lives of others, and take the pain away from some. In conclusion, the benefits of using stem cells and stem cell research highly outweigh the faults. Using stem cells or stem cell research is a way to develop therapies to regenerate damaged organs and heal people who are suffering from terrible diseases.
Although genetic engineering seems to be more harmful than helpful, when used correctly, it will help the society prosper. Considering the technology our society has currently developed, genetic engineering is a difficult topic to discuss and confirm. If the researchers confirm this process, it may become easier for the scientists and will help cure the diseases easily. The debate, however, will still be on the rise because of the issue in human morals and ethics.
However the big picture isn’t seen by many, and by allowing genetic engineering we will be able to save so many people’s lives that we never thought could be possible. Even though it is argued that we will not know exactly what will happen in the future of the genetically engineered person or how the new genes will react in their body, we do know that the risk is worth taking. People who do not give credit to genetic engineering think that “human g... ... middle of paper ... ...on of human embryos but they successfully argue that the benefits of therapeutic cloning outweigh the morally based objections regarding the process” (2011). Furthermore they emphasize the fact that human lives are spared and improved by the use of genetic engineering and that the destruction of human embryos can eventually be omitted out of the process in a near future through other forms of technology. All in all, there is a considerable amount of information on genetic engineering and steam cell research that could be beneficial to the public.
Cloning does not only threaten humans’ previous way of classifying life but leaps into the realm of ethicality. While some may say that cloning human beings is unethical, the counter argument poses the benefits of cloning go way past the argued ethics of human existence. Even though there are benefits, the ethics of making an entire new human being from another one is unethical but some small scale cloning appears to meet ethical “guidelines” and provide benefits toward medicinal practice. With the year now being 2016 and science technologies being more advanced than ever before, the human race can only keep obtaining more knowledge and grow better as a society. While there are global issues such as global warming, life expectancy, and world hunger, the well-being of the human race has continued to get better as the Earth spins round.
If somebody makes a mistake, it could end up affecting the next few generations of humans. In conclusion and my personal opinion, genetic engineering could lead to a technically better and more advanced world despite the fact that it suffers from deep moral downfalls. The main issue that causes debate seems to be if artificial superiority is a viable alternative to nature. It could work in society if people only used it for things such as evading cancer, but if a new social class is formed or people start creating super humans, it’s unquestionably a problem.
In reality, cloning, along with its counterpart gene therapy, is not intended for the production of a fully developed individual. Instead, cloning and gene therapy are about the medical advancement of the world's population through the control of diseases and replacement of missing hormones and organs. Although there are arguments against them, the possibilities of cloning and gene therapy are important for the production of organs and hormones and as a means to control diseases, but both must also be strictly regulated in order to outlaw the production of fully-developed human clones. Until 1997 the chance of mammalian cloning seemed just about as unlikely as finding a cure for AID... ... middle of paper ... ...mones and the control of disease to ensure the future health of the human race. Like In Vitro fertilization, humans need to open their eyes and accept these new techniques that are creeping over the horizon which can not only save lives, but increase our longevity as a society.
The purpose of the process is noble as it is generally aimed at eradicating genetic disorders and diseases (Yin, 2005). However, the question on when the human race will draw the line in regards to the alteration of the genes is a big issue. Who will stop the rich families, as this is an expensive procedure, from using this method to change their children’s genes and have them at an advantage against other children? The designer child debate is a raging debate with more concerns of sidestepping nature as to how it could change the society as we know it today (Ronald, 2007). Ethical considerations into the designer babies’ debate are placed on the basis of the effects that the procedure will have on the baby and the society.
We are one step from protecting ourselves from this immune system destroyer, but then, who knows what nature will strike us down with next? We must also confront the question of our faith. It is easy to justify improving our genes to save the lives of fellow human beings. How can we let a person grow up knowing s/he is going to suffer from epileptic seizures when we could have prevented it at birth? Wouldn't God want us to help these people?
Germline engineering one may have the power to allow parents to "enhance" their children to be more intelligent, more athletic, more attractive, healthier, and overall to have more of the good characteristics we would like for our children. If people would be genetically improved, it would benefit the society as a whole, just as it is already seen with gifted people. Improvement by germline is the rational conclusion of defensive medicine, since destroying a unneeded gene from the gene pool is like destroying smallpox from the populace. Finally, germline engineering will occur even if forbidden, since there will be demand and people prepared to pay. It is better to legalize this practice, so it can be safely regulate, rather than strengthening possible abuses and black
When it comes to the topic of genetic modification some of us will readily agree that humanity would be better off without it. Where as some are convinced that genetic modification may be the best way to go for the next generation, others maintain that it will cause conflict and separation between societies. Some of us can agree that even though scientists say genetic modification is to break the cycle of cancer and other inherited diseases, I say that along with the process comes the option of changing other features in your unborn child. Genetic modification should not occur because even though some consider it a good thing there are still a lot of negative things that come from this like cell imbalance. Genetic modification may decrease the chances of genetic diseases, but how can we be sure we obtained and modified all the infected cells.