Cloning Essay

     As soon as you mention the word cloning, you are most likely to ignite a debate. This is because people are greatly divided on whether it's good or bad. A way to reach a conclusion is to look at cloning from ethical, risk, and religious perspectives. The reality is, cloning is unethical, very risky, and irreligious. The arguments I will make will hopefully convince you that cloning is not good for the future.

2. The most effective argument in his essay is when he says “Millions are suffering. This is precisely the argument that research-cloning advocates are deploying today to allow them to break the moral barrier of creating.” In this argument he points out how the research advocates can't be trusted because a year ago, they assured they only wanted to do stem cell research on discarded embryos. He also points out that the research advocates create new excuses in order to keep breaking the moral barrier. In addition, they promised to only grow human clones only to the blastocyst stage. In other words, they would not create a human embryo in the laboratory. Today, they are campaigning hard to permit research for the creation of human embryos. This shows us that the research advocates are not keeping their promise because they are campaigning in order to create human embryos. The author's

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

Humans are on a constant quest in the search for perfection and advancement in all areas of life through progressive scientific knowledge. From such a stance, the future of humans appears boundless with all the potential possibilities biotechnology provides, but such developments will cause ethical, social and biological implications.

Over the last few decades Science Fiction has become an incredibly popular genre, but could you imagine something thought to be science fiction is actually science fact? Movies like Multiplication, Star Wars Episode II: Attack Of The Clones, and, Splice all have one thing in common, Cloning! This controversial topic was once thought to be imaginary, but has recently been pefected and many mixed opinions are developing because of it. Scholastic Scope magazine even came out with an article called “Should You Clone Your Pet?”. The way it works is, you take the embryo, a cluster of cells, from one organism then implant that embryo in a female of the same species womb. Finally you end up with a clone of the organism that you took the embryo of.

Ever since the birth of the first cloned sheep, named Dolly, the dream of human cloning has existed (Van Dijck, 1999). Cloning a mammal is described as the manipulation of an animal or human cell in order to create an identical copy of that animal’s or human’s nucleic DNA (Andrews, 1997). Though the dream of a human clone also comes with a lot of controversy regarding ethics and morals. Embryotic stem cell research, which could lead to a renewable source of human tissue, cells and eventually entire organs (Bowring, 2004), is highly controversial due to the necessity of placing a cloned embryo into a woman’s body

Cloning is defined as the “creation of an exact copy of a living matter, such as a cell or organism” according to Encarta encyclopedia. The copies produced through cloning have identical genetic makeup and are known as clones. Scientists use cloning techniques in the laboratory to create copies of cells or organisms with valuable traits.

Joshua Lederberg’s controversial article titled “Experimental Genetic and Human Evolution” promoting human cloning, published in the 60’s sparked the widespread debate on cloning that would continue for decades to come. Leon Kass, leader of the President’s council of bioethics and a prominent figure in this debate, engaged in a lively debate with Lederberg where he argued that the “programmed reproduction of a man would, in fact, dehumanize him.” Lederberg and Kass are arguably the most well-known figures in the debate surrounding the issue of human reproductive cloning, and their hardline views on this matter, to a large extent, reflect the views of most people I have talked to about human cloning. On reading pieces published by various medical ethicists and philosophers, I have had a hard-time distinguishing what pieces of information we can really trust as the process of human cloning and all of its perceived implications because of what they are: perceptions. We still have no real way of knowing what a “developed” process of cloning would look like and the only way we can really discuss this is to make rational assumptions of how human cloning could take place (the duration, whether the child will have a gestation period within the mother, the potential biological impediments of the process, etc). However, even so, we still have no real idea of how it would actually change societal

Differing viewpoint on Therapeutic cloning is not just limited to the general public, even researcher and professor have their own distinct judgement on the topic. The first view point that is going to be discussed is an opinion that supports therapeutic cloning. Shane Ham is a senior policy analyst for the Progressive Policy Institute, an education and research institute that promotes progressive politics geared to the informational age. Hams believes that Therapeutic cloning should be tolerated because it aids organ transplant, it’s an ethical form of cloning, and an embryo doesn’t have the same moral status as a human (Hams, 2007). Since Therapeutic cloning is very different from reproductive cloning, he believes it is a ethical form of

“Clones are organisms that are exact genetic copies. Every single bit of their DNA is identical” (Cloning). Clones can range anywhere from clones of whole organisms to clones of cells. “There are two ways to make an exact genetic copy of an organism in a lab: artificial embryo twinning and somatic cell nuclear transfer” (Cloning). Artificial embryo twinning is the “low-tech” way to create clones (Cloning). Artificial embryo twinning mimics the process in nature that creates identical twins (Cloning). In nature, twins in the first days after the egg and sperm join (Cloning). The embryo at this point is still made of a small number of unspecialized cells (Cloning). Identical twins are genetically identical because they are developed from the same fertilized egg after the embryo splits in half (Cloning). “Artificial embryo twinning uses the same approach, but it is carried out in a Petri dish instead of inside

Cloning refers to asexual reproduction, reproduction without fertilisation. A cloned individual may result from two different processes. The first of which is embryo splitting, this sometimes gives rise to monozygotic twins but can also result in identical triplets or even quadruplets. The second of which is Cell Nuclear Replacement (CNR) or Cell Nuclear Transfer (CNT). This was the procedure that produced Dolly. Cloning and stem cell research could be the future of fighting diseases and injuries. Cloning and Stem Cell Research is one of the most controversial topics talked about today. Especially when it comes to human cloning and embryonic stem cells.

Albeit not everybody would concur, I optate to argue that “Human Cloning” is erroneous! The noetic conception of someone playing god and engendering life from human DNA outrages me. No Matter how many times scientists fail to engender a plenarily engendered human copy they still don’t give up to pursue this desired goal. The first human embryos were unsuccessful as the embryos cellular division ceased after only 6 cells had divided making the experiment a failure for the scientists. I feel vigorously about this issue and in my opinion I don’t optically discern why “Human Cloning” is subsidiary for us humans, and how it benefits

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

Although the word itself has only been around for only four decades, the idea of creating an organism identical to another has been around for centuries. Even nature has utilized this process. The actual process of artificially cloning has been around since before 1900s, even though it is heard of more often in the modern world. Cloning began in 1894 with the first clone of an organism. Hans Dreisch was able to clone a sea urchin, and his research led to Hans Spemann’s multiple attempts and successes of cloning throughout his science years. As technology advanced, Robert Briggs and Thomas King used Spemann’s results to create the process of nuclear transfer used in modern cloning techniques. After many debates over