Many people wonder how it would be like to meet someone just like themselves. Cloning is a copy of another organism that has the exact same DNA as the original. Most people have strong moral views that using an ordinary body cell from someone who has already lived to reconstructing a new person would be intrinsically wrong. It would be immoral to clone a human being now or any time soon. Cloning is a social sin because it damages society and violates the dignity of human life.
People began speculating whether it was possible to clone a human and whether that would be ethical after the cloning of Dolly, the first mammal to be cloned, in 1996. “Many opponents of a ban on human-cloning research point out that the technology used to clone Dolly is not nearly advanced enough to be used to clone humans” (“Cloning”). The successful cloning of Dolly announced to the world that it was possible to clone adult mammals. This raised the possibility that human cloning was still imminent. Cloning-to-produce-children could create serious problems of identity and individuality. “Cloned children may experience concerns about their distinctive identity not only because each will be genetically essentially identical to another human being, but also because they may resemble in appearance younger versions of the person who is their “father” or “mother”” (Engdahl 113). Our genetic makeup does not by itself determine our identities, but our genetic uniqueness is an important source of our sense of who we are and how we regard ourselves. It is a symbol of independece and individuality. Knowing and feeling that nobody has previously possessed our particular gift of natural characteristics, we go forward as genetically unique individuals into relatively in...
... middle of paper ...
...ss of “improving” our offspring, allowing us to create a second genesis. For the first time, each person will become a private god and make offspring in his or her own image.
Many people are worried that if scientists are allowed to rush forward with human-cloning research, they will develop technology that will become uncontrollable. The technology would take years to perfect and it might at first produce unpredictable results. Creating humans who are likely to develop deformities or killing malformed fetuses would be morally indefensible. Most people balk at the idea of engineering a race of people with supposedly superior physical and mental traits, since that would mean that some characteristics would have to be deemed unwanted and eliminated. Scientists should stop their further research on human-cloning for a better world with people with their own uniqueness.
There are many questions surrounding the concept of cloning. Is it morally correct? Are clones
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.
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.
“Cloning represents a very clear, powerful, and immediate example in which we are in danger of turning procreation into manufacture.” (Kass) The concept of cloning continues to evoke debate, raising extensive ethical and moral controversy. As humans delve into the fields of science and technology, cloning, although once considered infeasible, could now become a reality. Although many see this advancement as the perfect solution to our modern dilemmas, from offering a potential cure for cancer, AIDS, and other irremediable diseases, its effects are easily forgotten. Cloning, especially when concerning humans, is not the direction we must pursue in enhancing our lives. It is impossible for us to predict its effects, it exhausts monetary funds, and it harshly abases humanity.
When the novel “Frankenstein”, by Mary Shelley came out in 1831 the general public was introduced to the idea of man creating another man scientifically; without the use of reproduction. This idea is still very interesting today, however many ethical problems are implicated when scientists, like Victor Frankenstein, disrupt the moral and ethical standards like many modern day scientists have done today with cloning. The astronomical effects that followed after the creation of The Monster, demonstrates the horrid fact that creating a human was not natural or ethical.
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.
From a strictly scientific point of view, we are just not ready to attempt the cloning of a human being. Our scientific knowledge of cloning has been compared to Mr. Ford's knowledge of the automobile just after the introduction of the Model A. The dangers of producing human clones with disabilities and disfigurements are high because of our low level of understanding of cloning and of human genetics in general. Even if the probabilities of disfigurement were low, human cloning could not be justified. What rationalization could be given to a child who would spend the rest of his life in horrible disfigurement? Even one person forced to spend his life in pain should be reason enough to avoid human cloning.
Many people say that everyone in the world has a twin. Today, science and technology has the ability to make this myth reality through the process of cloning. I am strongly against cloning for many reasons. People should not utilize cloning because it would destroy individuality and uniqueness, cause overpopulation, animal cruelty, it is against morals and ethics, and it violates many religious beliefs.
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?
Cloning, especially human cloning attracts increasingly more attention after the first mammal cloning animal Dolly born in 1997. Cloning is divided into two categories: therapeutic cloning and reproductive cloning. Therapeutic cloning is more related to tissue level cloning to transplant healthy cells and reproductive cloning is individual level cloning. Thus, the term cloning in this essay is used to describe both individual level and tissue level cloning. Public have different views. Some people support it because of its medical value, yet some people argue that it may bring many safety risks and moral problems. Hence, decisions ought to be made to identify the extent of cloning. Therefore, this essay introduces two major benefits of human cloning on disease therapy and analysis two arguments against it on safety and ethical issues.
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).
Cloning is a process by which genetically equal organisms are created with the same DNA. In simplest terms, clones are like twins born at different times. This procedure poses various dangers to society and humankind. One of the greatest threats this procedure creates is among
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.
"Human Cloning and Human Dignity: An Ethical Inquiry." The President's Council on Bioethics Washington, D.C. N.p., July-Aug. 2002. Web.
The Benefits of Human Cloning In recent years, many new breakthroughs in the areas of science and technology have been discovered. A lot of these discoveries have been beneficial to the scientific community and to the people of the world. One of the newest breakthroughs is the ability to clone. Ever since Ian Wilmut and his co-workers completed the successful cloning of an adult sheep named Dolly, there has been an ongoing debate on whether it is right or wrong to continue the research of cloning (Burley).