Human Cloning is not a Moral Issue There has been an onslaught of protests and people lobbying for a ban on human cloning ever since Dolly the sheep was cloned by Dr. Wilmut and his colleagues. Not only has the media exploited the ethics of the issue and scared the public with images of Frankenstein and evil scientists, but many worldwide authorities such as President Bill Clinton, Jacques Chirac of France, and Prime Minister John Major of Great Britain have all spoken out publicly against human cloning and have proposed legislation and committees to regulate and/or ban it. Religious leaders and the Pope have also talked about human cloning's dangers of "Playing God" and the "loss of uniqueness" that an individual would suffer if he or she were to be cloned. Many of these fears are misguided, misrepresented, and illogical. The benefits of human cloning would far outweigh the drawbacks, and cloning research should not lose funding or be banned. The most popular objection to human cloning is the assumption that science would be playing God if it was to create human clones. Reverend Albert Moraczewski states that cloning is intrinsically morally wrong, is an attempt to play God, and exceeds the limits of the delegated dominion given to the human race. (Madigan, 8) To say that this argument is unclear and unsupported is generous. It refuses to differentiate between cloning and the interruptions of biological processes which are viewed as commonplace in today's society. Religious objections were once raised at the prospects of autopsies , anesthesia, artificial insemination, organ transplants, and other acts which were seen to be tampering with divine will. (Madigan, 3) Yet enormous benefits have been reaped by each of these... ... middle of paper ... ...crime or illegal activity has a victim involved with it. Human cloning has no victim or loser in it. It is a chance for the advancement of science and humankind. Banning it or eliminating research funds would be a tremendous mistake when we haven't even perfected it or discovered all of the possible benefits. Works Cited Hopkins, Patrick D. Bad Copies: How Popular Media Represent Cloning as an Ethical Problem. Hastings Center Report April 1998: 1. SIRS Researcher. West High Library, Iowa City. 25 Jan. 2000 Madigan, Timothy J. Cloning Humans. Free Inquiry Summer 1997: 1. SIRS Researcher. West High Library, Iowa City. 20 Jan. 2000 The benefits of Human Cloning. Human Cloning Foundation. 25 Jan. 2000 Vere, Stephen. The Case for Cloning Humans. Taking Sides: Science, Technology, and Society. T. Easton (ed.); McGraw-Hill Publishing, 2000. 1-12.
A Rose for Emily Life is fickle and most people will be a victim of circumstance and the times. Some people choose not to let circumstance rule them and, as they say, “time waits for no man”. Faulkner’s Emily did not have the individual confidence, or maybe self-esteem and self-worth, to believe that she could stand alone and succeed at life especially in the face of changing times. She had always been ruled by, and depended on, men to protect, defend and act for her. From her Father, through the manservant Tobe, to Homer Barron, all her life was dependent on men.
Therapeutic cloning is the process whereby parts of a human body are grown independently from a body from STEM cells collected from embryos for the purpose of using these parts to replace dysfunctional ones in living humans. Therapeutic Cloning is an important contemporary issue as the technology required to conduct Therapeutic Cloning is coming, with cloning having been successfully conducted on Dolly the sheep. This process is controversial as in the process of collecting STEM cells from an embryo, the embryo will be killed. Many groups, institutions and religions see this as completely unacceptable, as they see the embryo as a human life. Whereas other groups believe that this is acceptable as they do not believe that the embryo is a human life, as well as the fact that this process will greatly benefit a large number of people. In this essay I will compare the view of Christianity who are against Therapeutic Cloning with Utilitarianism who are in favour of Therapeutic Cloning.
Anne Bradstreet is seen as a true poetic writer for the seventeenth century. She exhibits a strong Puritan voice and is one of the first notable poets to write English verse in the American colonies. Bradstreet’s work symbolizes both her Puritan and feminine ideals and appeals to a wide audience of readers. American Puritan culture was basically unstable, with various inchoate formations of social, political, and religious powers competing publicly. Her thoughts are usually on the reality surrounding her or images from the Bible. Bradstreet’s writing is that of her personal and Puritan life. Anne Bradstreet’s individualism lies in her choice of material rather than in her style.
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.
In recent discussions of cloning, a controversial issue has been whether cloning is ethical. On the one hand, some argue that scientists “playing god” by playing creating life However, Scientists argue that cloning is not “playing god” it’s a way to understand and improve human life. They believe god gave them the tools to improve society and increase our chances of survival
...w, the media has framed the cloning debate as an ethical debate and has provided the framework that much of the public views the issue. Among the articles that I reviewed, the main characterization of cloning as an ethical issue centers around two connected worries: the loss of individuality, the motivations behind cloning. In the presentation cloning the media has not always presented an objective view of cloning, but rather has played upon peoples fears about loss of individuality and questionable use of cloning to create uncertainty among the public.
The idea of creating life has intrigued people since the beginning of time. Mary Shelly in her novel Frankenstein brought this idea to life. In this novel, Victor Frankenstein created life by using advanced science and spare body parts. The idea of creating life is a current controversy. Technology now allows for the cloning of sheep. Certainly, the ability to clone humans cannot be far away. It is necessary to place restrictions on cloning research and to ban humans cloning because human cloning is immoral. Furthermore, the expectations placed on a cloned creature by society would be unbearable for the creature, and would lead to its psychological demise.
1930's it was a common idea to think women had a secondary l role in
Postrel, Virginia. “Should Human Cloning Be Allowed? Yes, Don’t Impede Medical Progress.” In Dynamic Argument. Ed. Robert Lamm and Justin Everett. New York: Houghton Mifflin, 2007. 420-23.
The poem’s beat is very calm and is in perfect iambic pentameter, which creates a nice and easy flow throughout the poem, giving the reader a sense of solitude. The rhyming scheme of the poem is in a form called a terza rhima, a rhyming effect usually achieved with extreme difficulty, but Frost did it with sheer genius, allowing the reader to more easily read the poem by identifying one line with another. This arrangement of rhymes further emphasizes the peaceful sound of the poem. In line ten, the author changes the spelling of the word goodbye to “good-by”, reasons being that one, to rhyme with t...
Imagine yourself in a society in which individuals with virtually incurable diseases could gain the essential organs and tissues that perfectly match those that are defected through the use of individual human reproductive cloning. In a perfect world, this could be seen as an ideal and effective solution to curing stifling biomedical diseases and a scarcity of available organs for donation. However, this approach in itself contains many bioethical flaws and even broader social implications of how we could potentially view human clones and integrate them into society. Throughout the focus of this paper, I will argue that the implementation of human reproductive cloning into healthcare practices would produce adverse effects upon family dynamic and society due to its negative ethical ramifications. Perhaps the most significant conception of family stems from a religious conception of assisted reproductive technologies and cloning and their impact on family dynamics with regard to its “unnatural” approach to procreation. Furthermore, the broader question of the ethical repercussions of human reproductive cloning calls to mind interesting ways in which we could potentially perceive and define individualism, what it means to be human and the right to reproduction, equality and self-creation in relation to our perception of family.
Scientists have no problem with the ethical issues cloning poses, as they claim the technological benefits of cloning clearly outweigh the possible social consequences, not to mention, help people with deadly diseases to find a cure. Jennifer Chan, a junior at the New York City Lab School, said, "?cloning body organs will help save many patients' lives," she said. "I think that cloning is an amazing medical breakthrough, and the process could stop at cloning organs--if we're accountable, it doesn't have to go any further." This argument seems to be an ethical presentation of the purpose of cloning. However, most, if not all scientists agree that human cloning won?t stop there. While cloning organs may seem ethical, cloning a human is dangerous. Still, scientists argue that the intentions of cloning are ethical. On the other hand, there are many who disagree with those claims. According to those from a religious standpoint, it is playing God, therefore, should be avoided. From a scientific standpoint it is also very dangerous, as scientists are playing with human cells which, if done wrong, can lead to genetic mutations that can either become fatal to the clone, or cause it severe disabilities. This information does, in fact, question the moral of the issue. If cloning is unsafe and harmful, what is the point?
Last of all, Cloning is not ethical, many religious groups look down upon cloning and think it’s not proper because they think it’s like playing God. Many scientists were mainly thinking about cloning animals and, most likely, humans in the future to harvest their organs and then kill them. “Who would actually like to be harvested and killed for their organs?” “Human cloning exploits human beings for our own self-gratification (Dodson, 2003).” A person paying enough money could get a corrupt scientist to clone anybody they wanted, like movie stars, music stars, athletes, etc (Andrea Castro 2005),” whether it be our desire for new medical treatments or our desire to have children on our own genetic terms (Dodson, 2003).
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.
The ethical implications of cloning are also significant. Cloning is a violation of the natural order of things and is therefore morally wrong. It is also a violation of human dignity and the sanctity of life. Cloning is a slippery slope that could lead to the creation of designer babies and the commodification of human life (Rau). In conclusion, human cloning is a dangerous and unethical practice that should be banned worldwide.