Today’s future is obsessed with the future. Millions of people read their horoscopes daily, hoping for insight into their future. Financial analysts make predictions of the financial markets. Film directors create sci-fi films depicting what the future might be. David Brook’s article, Looking Back on Tomorrow,” discusses his vision of what the future might look like. Brook predicts that the future will have extensive medical technology, globalization of power, economic inequality and democracy. Having observed these trends, I agree that the future will be heavily influenced by the issues Brook discusses. Having witnessed the poverty in Kenya in comparison to the opulence in the United States of America, it is evident that the economic divide between the rich and poor will continuer to grow. However, beyond the medical and economic what moral issues will arise in the future resulting from these topics? I would like to further explore the public’s potential response to future medical breakthroughs specifically cloning in relation to Christian ethics, making a prediction of the moral struggles future generations will face.
Lee Silver’s article “Reprogenetics: A Glimpse of things to Come” explores the future possibility of human cloning. Silver describes a theoretical situation of an expectant mother who is carrying her own clone. This ‘sci-fi’ plot is a looming possibility with the numerous medical advancements. As the Bible does not directly condemn human cloning Christians must infer whether this is right or wrong. Wayne Joseph’s, an author for the Christian Courier, wrote “The Ethics of Human Cloning” he describes a series of the moral implications of cloning. He asks why scientists want to clone human beings. He answers this question by writing, “…they are anxious to create a brand of create a brand of humans with whom they can experiment.” He compares their actions as being similar to Adolf Hitler during the cold war. He describes scientists’ actions as being similar to slavery. That clones would be destroyed in the misguided notion, that is purportedly to improve the quality of life.
The cloning of human beings could be perceived as “playing God”.
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.
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.
In his piece, “Human Dignity”, Francis Fukuyama explores the perception of human dignity in today's society. This perception is defined by what Fukuyama calls “Factor X”. This piece draws attention to how human dignity has been affected recently and its decline as we go into the future. Using the input given by the Dalai Lama in his piece, “Ethics and New Genetics”, the implementing of factor X and human dignity on future generations will be explored. Through the use of the pieces, “Human Dignity and Human Reproductive Cloning by Steven Malby, Genetic Testing and Its Implications: Human Genetics Researchers Grapple with Ethical Issues by Isaac Rabino, and Gender Differences in the Perception of Genetic Engineering Applied to Human Reproduction by Carol L. Napolitano and Oladele A. Ogunseitan, the decline on the amount of human dignity found in today's society as well as the regression in Factor X that can be found today compared to times past. Society's twist on ethics as a result of pop culture and an increase in genetic engineering has caused for the decline in the amount of dignity shown by the members of society and the regression of Factor X to take hold in today's society.
Winston is confronted with struggle throughout the entirety of George Orwell`s dystopian novel Nineteen Eighty-Four. Living within a totalitarian regime subsequently causes Winston to seek approaches for dealing with such abundant oppression; he finds liberation through self-awareness, understanding and ultimately rebellion. First, Winston realizes that “if you want to keep a secret you must also hide it from yourself”, alluding to the notion of thoughtcrime (162). This recognition exemplifies the complete cognizance that Winston has regarding the oppressive society displayed throughout the novel. Next, Syme states “It’s a beautiful thing, the destruction of words”, alluding to the idea of Newspeak (28). This statement directly correlates to Winston speaking with other party members to gain knowledge about how others feels about policies deployed by the government. This information-seeking also connects with Winston`s rebellion, as he actively searched for others to join his uprising, which is shown when Winston tells O’Brien “We want to join [The Brotherhood]” (171). Winston’s attempt to join a rebellious organization exhibits his evident desire to release his suppressed emotions. Winston devises a very methodical approach to deal with the problematic society he resides in.
“The great myth of our times is that technology is communication” said by a very old composer named Libby Larsen. People all over are discussing and trying to distinguish rather technology of our time is beneficial or harmful. In the text “ Our Future Selves” by Eric Schmidt and Jared Cohen they explain what they propose will happen to the world once it becomes more “connected”. As Schmidt and Cohen illustrate what life will be like in a “connected” world they begin to explain how this connectivity can make our world a better place. Yes, I do believe greater “connectivity” will make the world politically, culturally, socially, and economically a “better” place because the world will be able to share and communicate better increasing efficient
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.
Cloning is an exciting and ongoing field of study with many great possibilities, and negative drawbacks; this leaves many Christians wrestling with the idea of cloning, trying to decide where to stand on, for or against it. To follow, in the paper is an explanation of what cloning is and the uses of cloning at the present and projected in the future. After that the focus will be on the problems with cloning from a non-ethical stance. Finally the issue of cloning and Christian’s views on it will be addressed.
...e pressing issue that will question our morals, ethics, and view on human dignity. As a society, we must come to a decision regarding Human Cloning and stand by it, whether it is the right decision or not. Our actions will have a profound impact on the methods of reproduction used by future generations.
In the essay, Cloning Reality: Brave New World by Wesley J. Smith, a skewed view of the effects of cloning is presented. Wesley feels that cloning will end the perception of human life as sacred and ruin the great diversity that exists today. He feels that cloning may in fact, end human society as we know it, and create a horrible place where humans are simply a resource. I disagree with Wesley because I think that the positive effects of controlled human cloning can greatly improve the quality of life for humans today, and that these benefits far outweigh the potential drawbacks that could occur if cloning was misused.
“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.
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.
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.
Imagine a world in which a clone is created only for its organs to be transplanted into a sick person’s body. Human cloning has many possible benefits, but it comes with concerns. Over the past few decades, researchers have made several significant discoveries involving the cloning of human cells (ProQuest Staff). These discoveries have led to beneficial medical technologies to help treat disease (Aldridge). The idea of cloning an entire human body could possibly revolutionize the medical world (Aldridge). However, many people are concerned that these advancements would degrade self-worth and dignity (Hyde and Setaro 89). Even though human cloning brings about questions of bioethics, it has the potential to save and recreate the lives of humans and to cure various diseases without the use of medication (Aldridge, Hyde and Setaro).
The. “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>.
If we compare the present with the past, if we trace events at all epochs to their causes, if we examine the elements of human growth, we find that Nature has raised us to what we are, not by fixed laws, but by provisional expedients, and that the principle which in one age effected the advancement of a nation, in the next age retarded the mental movement, or even destroyed it altogether. War, despotism, slavery, and superstition are now injurious to the progress of Europe, but they were once the agents by which progress was produced. By means of war the animated life was slowly raised upward in the scale, and quadrupeds passed into man. By means of war the human intelligence was brightened, and the affections were made intense; weapons and tools were invented; foreign wives were captured, and the marriages of blood relations were forbidden; prisoners were tamed, and the women set free; prisoners were exchanged, accompanied with presents; thus commerce was established, and thus, by means of war, men were first brought into amicable relations with one another. By war the tribes were dispersed all over the world, and adopted various pursuits according to the conditions by which they were surrounded. By war the tribes were compressed into the nation. It was war which founded the Chinese Empire. It was war which had locked Babylonia, and Egypt, and India. It was war which developed the genius of Greece. It was war which planted the Greek language in Asia, and so rendered possible the spread of Christianity. It was war which united the world in peace from the Cheviot Hills to the Danube and the Euphrates. It was war which saved Europe from the quietude of China. It was war which made Mecca the centre of the East. It was war which united the barons in the Crusades, and which destroyed the feudal system.