Human Reproductive Cloning Is Immoral And Unnatural

Some people actually say that we can benefit from cloning. Scientists think that we can clone “geniuses” and advance in society (Utah Genetics). This brings up a very good point. What if we can clone 5 Albert Einsteins?! What if we clone all of the smartest minds to ever exist. Can we cure cancer? I think we can! Maybe we can even stop ebola. Lots of people are seriously thinking about this and how beneficial it would be. But some people can take this out of hand. Some scientists are considering making “human farms” where clones are made and their only purpose is to kill them and take their organs to sell. This is why cloning should not be easily accessible. Some freaky scientists are actually considering this idea. We need to be smarter, we need to be consistent , and we need to keep an eye out for these crazy scientists. And God knows what other crazy idea they have inside their heads. But many people think that cloning can be beneficial to society if it is used

. . concerns can be addressed when reproductive cloning has been shown to be safe in animals, which it has not yet." (Paulson) The success rate by means of reproductive cloning remains pale in comparison to natural procreation, and thus does not justify cloning as a form of procreation for the time being. The current success rate for reproductive cloning stands at one or two viable offspring per 100 experiments, and until the success rate drastically increases, cloning humans would be potentially dangerous and unethical.

Secondly, cloning kills another animal. Cloning takes chromosomes from an egg and destroys them. That cell was going to be a new animal. Take Dolly it took 277 tries, that is 277 baby sheep killed to make another already existing sheep. If we were to clone humans any scientist who clones is technically a murderer. Other examples is the dog Snuppy they used 97 eggs to get 3 puppies. That means 97 individual puppies dead to make a clone’s clones. This is another, more grim, reason why cloning is not a good thing.

Cloning is very unethical. It would be violating the human rights in many ways. It would be violating of the freedom of beliefs and thoughts (Peter Flaherty, and D. Lynn Moore. Civics. McGraw-Hill Ryerson, 2000) Cloning also reduces human dignity. Humans can be sold as manufactured products. If we allow

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

While there appears to be many advantages for the continuation of cloning research, there are other drawbacks that may negatively impact the society in the future. Cloning may reduce genetic variability by producing populations that have the same genetic make-up. This population would be susceptible to the same diseases and could potentially be wiped out by a single strain of virus. Such a result could be catastrophic and devastate entire nations. Cloning in human would inevitably lead to testings on human subjects and genetic tailoring of offspring. It is plausible that scientists could alter genetic coding to produce a baby with desirable traits resulting in a ‘perfect human’ with heightened senses and sub-normal intelligence. There have been no occurrences to

Example: A women lost her daughter in a flood. That woman decided to take her daughters skin cells and uses it for reproductive cloning in order to have her “daughter” back. This is morally wrong. There is no point for her to do this because the person, clone, will have a different personality from the daughter. This will be a disadvantage to the person,

There are many arguments against cloning. Leon R. Kass bases his argument on repugnance in his article The Wisdom of Repugnance. He is a well-known physician, educator and scientist. Kass perceives cloning as offensive, grotesque revolting, repulsive and wrong. To establish his argument he states, “Most people recoil from the prospect of mass production or human being, with large clones of look-alikes, compromised in their individuality.”1 His rationale is cloning is unnatural, because it is asexual and requires only one parent. Kass believes that cloning turns natural procreation into a manufactured process, which is not natural or moral. In his essay he also points out that cloning will also change the way we see ourselves through our

While some believe cloning to be acceptable others feel equally strongly that human cloning is completely wrong. With the state of the science as it is at the moment it would involve hundreds of damaged pregnancies to achieve one single live cloned baby. What is more, all the evidence suggests that clones are unhealthy and often have a number of built-in genetic defects, which lead to premature ageing and death. It would be completely wrong to bring a child into the world knowing that it was extremely likely to be affected by problems like these. The dignity of human life and the genetic uniqueness we all have would be attacked if cloning became commonplace. People might be

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

Imagine a future where humans are manufactured, a future where humans are created by science, a future where humans are the new lab specimen. Human cloning is like opening Pandora's Box, unleashing a torrent of potential evils but at the same time bringing a small seed of hope. No matter how many potential medical and scientific benefits could be made possible by human cloning, it is unethical to clone humans.

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

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.

Science has been plagued with the limits of ethics and morals of the people that fail to see the bigger picture that research can help to bring great things to the world. Cloning is one of the major fields that are affected by closed minded beliefs and laws that prohibit research. Should the search for finding medicine that could save lives and the chance for people to have healthy offspring be denied because of the misconceptions of different generations? Cloning should be allowed because of the medical benefits that it provides, the only way that it can become more ethical is with research to find the best techniques, and yet none of this is possible because of the laws that restrict the research.