Introduction
The first successful cloning of a mammal, the sheep named Dolly, was arguably one of the most celebrated scientific achievements of the past decade. The cloning of Dolly brought to the forefront a longstanding debate about cloning human beings. The possibility of cloning a human being will have great significance especially in the healthcare industry since previously unachievable operations could now be feasible especially with the prospect of a new way of creating stem cells which possess the ability to treat heart diseases, cancer, and other daunting diseases.
Despite this promising future that cloning purports to forecast for the human race, the research projects have been met with fierce opposition from lawmakers to clergy men. Most of the opposition is on ethical grounds and while McLaren retorts that there is nothing unethical about using technology to save lives, opposition groups are far from being appeased. Considering the fact that most of the controversy about cloning arises from misinformation or ignorance about the matter, this paper shall set out to conclusively research on cloning, its merits and demerits so as to attest if the explicit ban of human cloning is justifiable.
What is cloning?
Cloning is described as the creation of genetically identical organisms by use of asexual artificial means. Cohen relates that cloning was practiced since the 1960s on plants example carrots.
Merits of Cloning
Cloning, if wholly embraced proposes to bring radical changes in many spheres of life. Majority of the people have begun viewing cloning as one of the feasible ways of creating means of feeding a world whose population is constantly on the rise. Pinon hugely favors the cloning of animals for mass produ...
... middle of paper ...
...ism?, Journal of Healthcare Management, 2009 . 54(4),
Cohen, D, Cloning. Boston: Twenty-First Century Books , 2002.
George, K. Women as Collateral Damage: A critique of egg harvesting for cloning research, Women's Studies International Forum, 2008.
Haran, J. (2007). Human Cloning in the media: from Science Fiction to Science ,Practice. NY: Routledge.
Kunich, J. C, The Naked Clone: How Cloning Bans Threaten our Personal Rights , CA: Greenwood Publishing Group, 2003.
Levine, D. A. (2009), Cloning; World Issues Today, The Rosen Publishing Group, 2009.
McLaren, A, Cloning, Ethical Eye, Council of Europe, 2002.
Pinon, R, Biology of Human Reproduction, University Science Books, 2002.
The President’s Council on Bioethics, Arguments For ‘Reproductive Cloning, 2002,
http://webharvest.gov/peth04/20041015181614/http://bioethics.gov/background/workpaper3a.html>.
Silver’s argument illustrates to his audience that reproductive cloning deems permissible, but most people of today’s society frown upon reproductive cloning and don’t accept it. He believes that each individual has the right to whether or not they would want to participate in reproductive cloning because it is their reproductive right. However, those who participate in cloning run the risk of other’s imposing on their reproductive rights, but the risk would be worth it to have their own child.
McGee, Glenn, (2001). Primer on Ethics and Human Cloning. ActionBioscience.org. Retrieved October 3, 2004, from: http://www.actionbioscience.org/biotech/mcgee.html
“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.
Cloning has been in nature for thousands of years, a clone is a living thing made from another consisting of the same DNA. For example identical twins are clones because they have the same DNA but the differ because the twins begin after conception when a zygote, a totipotent stem cell, divides into two, some plants self-pollinate and produce a seed, which in turn, makes plants with the same genetic code (Hyde). According to the Human Genome Project there are three types of cloning, DNA, therapeutic and reproductive; DNA cloning involves transferring DNA from a donor to another organism, therapeutic cloning, known as embryo cloning, involves harvesting stem cells from human embryos to grow new organs for transplant, and last is reproductive cloning which creates a copy of the host (Conger). One of the earliest cloned animals was a sea urchin by Hans Dreisch in the late 1800’s. Unlike Victor Frankenstein, Dreisch’s goal was to prove that genetic material is not lost in cell division, not to create another being, (History of Cloning) stated by Frankenstein “that I might infuse a spark of being into the lifeless thing that lay at my feet.” There are many ways an animal...
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.
Brannigan, C. Michael. Ethical Issues in Human Cloning. New York: Seven Bridges Press, Chatham House Publishers, 2001.
8. Pellegrino, Edmund D., “Human Cloning and Human Dignity.” The President’s Council on Bioethics. 22 July 2007
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.
In recent years our world has undergone many changes and advancements, cloning is a primary example of this new modernism. On July 5th, 1995, Dolly, the first cloned animal, was created. She was cloned from a six-year-old sheep, making her cells genetically six years old at her creation. However, scientists were amazed to see Dolly live for another six years, until she died early 2005 from a common lung disease found in sheep. This discovery sparked a curiosity for cloning all over the world, however, mankind must answer a question, should cloning be allowed? To answer this question some issues need to be explored. Is cloning morally correct, is it a reliable way to produce life, and should human experimentation be allowed?
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.
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.
Recent discoveries involving cloning have sparked ideas of cloning an entire human body (ProQuest Staff). Cloning is “the production of an organism with genetic material identical to that of another organism” (Seidel). Therapeutic cloning is used to repair the body when something isn’t working right, and it involves the production of new cells from a somatic cell (Aldridge). Reproductive cloning involves letting a created embryo develop without interference (Aldridge). Stem cells, if isolated, will continue to divide infinitely (Belval 6). Thoughts of cloning date back to the beginning of the twentieth century (ProQuest Staff). In 1938, a man decided that something more complex than a salamander should be cloned (ProQuest Staff). A sheep named Dolly was cloned from an udder cell in 1997, and this proved that human cloning may be possible (Aldridge). In 1998, two separate organizations decl...
Robinson, Bruce. “Human Cloning: Comments by political groups, religious authorities, and individuals.” 3 August 2001. Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance. 1 October 2001 <http://www.religioustolerance.org/clo_reac.htm>.
Cloning is asexual reproduction. Cuttings are taken from a mother plant in vegatative growth, and rooted in hydroponic medium to be grown as a separate plant. The offspring will be plants that are identical to the parent plant.