Arguments Against Pet Cloning

529 Words2 Pages

Pet Cloning
The debate on whether to clone pets or not has been on the rise internationally. Pet cloning is different from animal cloning. This is because pets attract emotional attachment to their owners hence the feud whether it is morally and practical to clone a pet. Pet cloning begun few years ago and many pet owners have found it an alternative to their loss. Autumn Feistier and Hillary Bok argue their different views about pet cloning.
In her argument for supporting pet cloning, Autumn Feistier insist that pet cloning is ethically and morally justified (Stephen, 132). She poses the idea that it is an ideal way to stretch the experience the owner of the pets has. Considering how expensive veterinary care is, cloning seems to be the ideal way to save money and have variety of the same pet. In her argument, Autumn believes that some pets are very valuable and hence it would be difficult to replace them with new pets. Also in consideration is how emotionally attached some pet …show more content…

A cloned pet can never be the same as the original because of different upbringing, environment and experiences. Trying to continue where you stopped with the dead pet may be hard for the owner and so a replica of the pet may only give solace to the grieving owner. Hillary says it’s immoral to clone pets and try to take advantage of grieving owners. Pet cloning also causes great harm to animals. The animal being cloned is more likely to have defects than the original animal. He argues that the whole process is harmful to animal and does not guarantee that the owners will get the same pet. Cloning animals for commercial benefit is better than pet cloning which is just used to give the owner some consolation. Companies that do pet cloning are accused of taking advantage of the pet owner’s grief. The originality and dignity of a pet can never be replaced so by cloning the pet you reduce

More about Arguments Against Pet Cloning

Open Document