Essay on Human Cloning is not a Moral Issue

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

The topic of cloning has brought much debate in science and also in society. Many

“We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness”

Cloning is very unpredictable. Because of this, the results are unclear. Therefore, it is likely that people are apprehensive towards this technology in that there is a fifty percent chance the outcome will result negatively. There is no way to understand how human cloning will affect us as a species since the technology to do so has not yet been developed and used (‘Human Cloning”). Not only does human cloning stretch beyond our understanding but also it has a negative connotation in society. As stated in “Human Cloning”, “Expressing the popular distaste for cloning, Clinton stated that it undermines the uniqueness and sacredness of human life” (“Cloning”). It is evident that cloning provides for a negative connotation. If the technology and science behind human cloning were to be stable and provide for a predictable outcome, it would be a less controversial topic in society. Undeniably the unpredictable nature of human cloning proves that the science behind it is far too advanced for our wisdom to use it

Six years ago, an event in genetic history changed our perspective on "reproduction" and added to our conscience a new element in the study of biology. On February 23, 1997, the world was introduced to Dolly, a 6-month-old lamb that was cloned from a single cell taken from the tissue of an adult donor. Ever since the birth of this sheep, a question that never before existed now lingers in the mind of many: should human cloning be a part of our society?

Imagine a world where everyone looked like you and was related to you as a sibling, cousin, or any form of relation, wouldn’t that be freaky? Although cloning is not an important issue presently, it could potentially replace sexual reproduction as our method of producing children. Cloning is a dangerous possibility because it could lead to an over-emphasis on the importance of the genotype, no guaranteed live births, and present risks to both the cloned child and surrogate mother. It also violates the biological parent-child relationship and can cause the destruction of the normal structure of a family. The cloning of the deceased is another problem with cloning because it displays the inability of the parents to accept the child’s

The act of cloning a human being comes dangerously close to human beings acting as God. Do human beings have the right to tamper with nature in this way? This essay explores the various ethical issues related to the cloning debate, and seeks answers to this deep philosophical question at the heart of bioethics. As a student of genetic biology and future biologist, this question also has personal relevance. Our science is evolving at a rapid pace. As human cloning becomes increasingly possible, it is important that we analyze the ethics of cloning so that judicious public policy can be created. It is therefore my position that research into cloning should continue to fulfill the fundamental goals of scientific exploration and to explore the possibilities that cloning might have in terms of benefitting human society; on the other hand, there are certainly ethical limits to the practice of cloning. It is important to define those ethical limits, so that scientists understand the best ways to proceed.

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.

Science today is developing at warp speed. We have the capability to do many things, which include the cloning of actual humans! First you may ask what a clone is? A clone is a group of cells or organisms, which are genetically identical, and have all been produced from the same original cell. There are three main types of cloning, two of which aim to produce live cloned offspring and one, which simply aims to produce stem cells and then human organs. These three are: reproductive cloning, embryo cloning and therapeutic cloning. The goal of therapeutic cloning is to produce a healthy copy of a sick person's tissue or organ for transplant, and the goal of both reproductive cloning and embryo cloning is to

Since March 1997, the birth of a cloned sheep, named Dolly, has caused a great sensation around the world. Though it was not the first time that the experiment using cloning succeeded, the reason why Dolly shocked the world was that she was the first clone from a cell of an adult mammal, something previously thought to be impossible. This meant that the possibility of cloaning human beings was increased. For fear of realizing human cloning, a lot of countries have taken necessary measures to regulate the study of it. Some people, such as scientists in this field and certain infertile couples, are now arguing against banning it. But I think we should ban human cloning because it has a possibility to reduce the value of our life, to take away

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.

Many Americans do not understand how risky it will be to clone a human, not to mention how hard it is to clone an animal. Many news article and publications offer this information to the public, because many scientists will not address the media with the real facts. In an article titled, “Creator of cloned sheep, Dolly, says he wouldn’t want to make copies of humans”, Dr. Wilmut stresses that only 1-5% of those embryos used in cloning result in live animals, and survivors are plagued with obesity, kidney problems and other troubles, and even Dolly is suffering from arthritis (1). Most cloned animals, like cows, pigs, goats, sheep, die during embryonic development, and others are stillborn with monstrous abnormalities. Bloated mothers have laborious miscarriages, and occasionally die themselves. The clones usually struggle for air in intensive care units, only to have to be euthanized, the process of ending the life of an individual suffering from a terminal illness or an incurable condition, according to an MSNBC article titled, “Much confusion over cloning” (1). The risks and uncertainties associated with the current technological state of cloning are the basis for why

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

What would you say if I told you that scientists had just developed a new procedure that could lead not only to the cure for cancer, but would provide an unlimited source of organ donors and could lead to the first effective treatment of nerve damage? Now adding on to this scenario lets say that our government was taking action to ban this new procedure because of a few myths and some loud mouthed conservatives.