Cloning : An Controversial Article Titled ' Experimental Genetic And Human Evolution ' Promoting Human Cloning

What was once thought to be the content of fiction novels and comic books is now being fully explored and realized in the cutting edge world of modern science. Scientists now possess the necessary capabilities and technology to make the process of human cloning a reality. While this is a controversial and rather sensitive topic, cloning is an innovative practice that has the potential to vastly improve the lives of unlimited amounts of people. Although cloning may prove to be a useful remedy for many of today’s issues, there are those in the scientific and medical fields who remain vehemently opposed to its practice. It is for this reason that lawmakers, scientists, and doctors around the world are currently locked in a fierce standoff

In Leon Kass’s “The Wisdom of Repugnance” critical article he addresses the dangers of cloning and why we should not pursue the idea of it. Kass starts out by stating that Joshua Lederberg, one of the major contributors to the idea of cloning, has an amoral view to “this morally weighty subject”( Kass 17). We have been softened up on the idea of cloning because of how cloning has made its way into our daily lives; although it may be subtle, it can easily slip into our minds and soften us up to see cloning is moral when it is amoral. We have taken cloning so far that it is even integrated into our families by our embryos; people will be able to change the identity of their children, leading us to re-create ourselves. Which is immoral

The 21st century however forecasts an astonishing increase in innovation in another direction. While previously overshadowed by its larger cousins, physics and chemistry, it seems likely that the biological sciences will steal the limelight in the future. Mapping the genome, reversing the aging process, and finding a cure for terminal illnesses, all represent primary objectives for science. Unfortunately, the ethical questions posed by innovations in biomedicine are far greater than those posed by advances in the physical sciences. Reproductive cloning is one of these innovations, and one that arguably poses the greatest threat to the world as we know it. The universal truth, blindly accepted by man for millennia, held that a human could only be born through the sexual union of a male and a female, to be exact, of an egg and a sperm. By cloning, however, a human life can be created in the laboratory. This is done by taking human DNA and inserting it into an egg cell, sans genetic material. The resultant cell is identical to the original, and can then be inserted into a uterus, either a human or an animal one, and be grown to term, to produce a baby, while circumventing nature’s means of reproduction.

In the article “Human Cloning Just Because We Haven't Doesn't Mean We Can't” by Dana Dovey, Explains about what cloning is and what it does.To start out with Cloning a human is dangerous beacuse we dont know how long it will live,And In the article it states “Most things on earth have half there DNA from half there father and the other half from the mother” If you clone someone it only comes from one paret so it will be the same as the person that gave the DNA.Therefor the closest thing to us that they have cloned is a monkey.

A mad scientist stands in one part of a double-chambered machine, leaving the other empty. As he presses a button, gears begin to whir and smoke. A bright light flashes, and out of the empty chamber steps a perfect replica of the scientist, complete with clothes and command of the English language.

In discussions of Cloning, one controversial issue has been Cloning Humans. On the one hand, Paul Stark argues that Cloning is wrong and shouldn't be done. On the other hand, Simon Smith contends that we could Clone human organs and put them into cloned pigs so that we have more organs for transplants and many more possibilities. My own view is in the middle of the issue. That I believe Cloning is dangerous and uncertain of the outcome. But the number of benefits from cloning is infinite.

The first problem that human cloning encounter is it is one of unethical processes because it involves the alteration of the human genetic and human may be harmed, either during experimentation or by expectations after birth. “Cloning, like all science, must be used responsibly. Cloning human is not desirable. But cloning sheep has its uses.”, as quoted by Mary Seller, a member of the Church of England’s Board of Social Responsibility (Amy Logston, 1999). Meaning behind this word are showing us that cloning have both advantages and disadvantages. The concept of cloning is hurting many human sentiments and human believes. “Given the high rates of morbidity and mortality in the cloning of other mammals, we believe that cloning-to-produce-children would be extremely unsafe, and that attempts to produce a cloned child would be highly unethical”, as quoted by the President’s Council on Bioethics. Since human cloning deals with human life, it said to be unethical if people are willing to killed embryo or infant to produce a cloned human and advancing on it. The probability of this process is successful is also small because the technology that being used in this process is still new and risky.

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

Human cloning is one of the most controversial topics regarding modern science, and the advances of genealogical study. There are many opposing views on the topic. Many people chose to bring things such as human safety, implications on basic morality, and even the violation of things such as religion and nature itself into the debate. Both sides of the infamous "cloning debate" have their standings, and both sides propose valid points. Human cloning however should be legalized and funded because of how new it is to modern science, the many benefits to be had in the scientific field of biology from it, and the benefit that could be had in the medical field.

The cloning of humans is now very close to reality, thanks to the historic scientific breakthrough of Dr. Ian Wilmut and his colleagues in the UK. This possibility is one of incredible potential benefit for all of us. Unfortunately the initial debate on this issue has been dominated by misleading, sensationalized accounts in the news media and negative emotional reactions derived from inaccurate science fiction. Much of the negativity about human cloning is based simply on the breathtaking novelty of the concept rather than on any real undesirable consequences. On balance, human cloning would have overwhelming advantages if regulated in a reasonable way. A comprehensive ban on human cloning by a misinformed public would be a sorry

Many ethical and moral dilemmas arise when discussing human cloning, and one can have many positions for and against each. To understand the issues surrounding human cloning, one must have a basic

   People often question whether or not cloning is morally acceptable in our society, and also if it is worth all the money that we spend on research for cloning.  It is hard to believe that not to long ago many people believed that joining a sperm and an egg in a test tube was considered to be morally wrong.  It is now used by millions of doctors around the world.  Cloning is at the beginning stages of being considered morally unacceptable and will soon move to be just like in-vitro fertilization.  Soon everyone will understand the benefits of cloning in agriculture, medicine, and social parenthood.  It is quite obvious that cloning has many social, agricultural, and medical benefits which

Before beginning, it is important to go over the definition of the word “clone”. According to Dictionary.com, the word clone is defined as “a cell, cell product, or organism that is genetically identical to the unit or individual from which it was derived” . It is also described as “a person or thing that duplicates, imitates, or closely resembles another in appearance, function, performance or style” . In addition, the word clone is derived from the Greek word Klonos, which means “branch”. Throughout this paper, I will be talking about the topic of human cloning. However, there are many who have concluded to different definitions. To clarify, and use a specific definition, the American Medical Association defines the method of cloning as the production of genetically identical organisms. In summary, the process of cloning is producing a child, with completely identical genes, or parent. It is important to realize that cloning does not necessarily produce an exact replica of the individual cloned. The object that is cloned is the DNA/genes, which copies itself and duplicates.

Essay Question (2): Explain in full the ‘life in the shadow’ argument against human reproductive cloning. How might the argument be objected to? Do you regard the argument to be morally decisive, in the sense that it establishes that human cloning for purely reproductive purposes must never be permitted? Explain and defend your answer.

No one knows why these attempts failed and why one succeeded.” (Kolehmainen, 2017) To see something as valuable as an embryo carelessly destroyed in the process of reproductive cloning is a travesty, in numerous ways, not only does it further prove that cloning unable to safely provided a stable live product, but more so destroys a multitude of potential lives to create one possible abominate one. In accordance to Dr. Tanja Dominko’s reports, in the New York Time article “In cloning, Failure far exceeds success”, her three years of experimenting, and going through 300 attempts with monkeys, the only result she has come up with are some of the most grotesquely abnormal embryos containing cells that have little to none chromosomes whatsoever. Some even bare resemblance to that of cancerous cells as opposed to animals with healthy cells. (Kolata, 2001) But, the most promenade one, which has been over looked the most by far, would be the indefinite hazardous consequences cloning would have on our gene pools. “The process of cloning would inevitably invite the use of other genetic technologies, specifically genetic manipulation of cloned embryos, and this could result in permanent, heritable changes to the human gene pool.” (Kolehmainen, 2017) Such practices of artificially creating a human being only spills disaster in the laboratory, in more ways than one. Materials and funds go to waste with each failure, and those clones that do indeed exist do not last