Persuasive Speech On Cloning

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

There are some people that have been very anxious with cloning because they believe it is something new, but in reality it was introduced in the 1950s. It started with cloning food and has moved onto cloning animals. It has been successful on many different cases and a famous one is the cloning of a sheep named Dolly. Dolly lived to be six and a half years old and she had six kids. People believe that cloning should be illegal but we believe that scientists should clone endangered or extinct species in order to preserve them, here’s why.

According to Gary Wickman, Human cloning can give rise to certain medical issues. Technically, human gene grows older with age. It’s feared that the cloned individual would retain the age of the donor’s genes. Imagine what will happen if a 40 year old gene is manifested into a newborn baby (Wickman, 2017). The health risks involved with human cloning is something that cannot be sidelined on all accounts. There is a possibility that the cloned individual might carry certain abnormalities, and may die sooner than the standard life expectancy.

With that comes the pros about cloning and why we should do it. There's a lot of reason why for example, it can help the LGBT community by providing a child without having to use a sperm donor. Which is crazy I know but makes a lot of sense because the LGBT community gives everything to have a child but they can't really have one together from the same parents. Well cloning came up with a idea that they should try to cloning a child for that lesbian couple and they did do it. Which that really gives everyone hope because we can grow together. In Article “Argument for and Against Creating Human Clones” in paragraph three on the third sentence it state that “Human cloning could allow parents of a child who died to seek redress for their loss”. That means that instead of just cry about your love ones who died you can just clone it. It really opens a big door for us and how we see and view things. It gives us hope about our future and what it might become. Did you notice that the quote said it “Could allow” it didnt really say it was already done or it can be done. Which leaves a huge cap there, Cloning is not good for anyone it take everything away from us humans as well as the meaning of us living.

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

Cloning kills individuality. What if human cloning was allowed? Would you still feel special and unique? I certainly wouldn’t but many people believe human cloning will not compromise human individuality. Those people would accept them as another part of human society according to the article, “Arguments for and Against Creating Human Clones”. Even if people did

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

Dear, Governor Jerry Brown, I am writing to to you because I have noticed a new bill come up and it's about cloning. I believe that we should not pass this bill, we should stop it, and it shouldn't have became a bill in the first place. I think we should stop funding cloning and should stop treating it like it's the right thing to do. We should not as a state, pass this law. Why? Well because thats a waste of taxpayer money. We can fund other nessicasity, like better school and education. We can fund things that are relevant instead of something that barely anyone can afford. Cloning is useless and the only good thing about it, is that we can learn more science from it. Another reason why you should not pass it, the scientist can use it the wrong way. The scientist who work on cloning can make some sort of superhuman or super animal with hybrid genetics, and where they are so superior we can't defeat it, and there goes the worlds then we are in a apocalypse. And for my last reason on why you should not pass this bill, it's not life like, if something's passes away then it passes away, no need to bring it back, and it may even suffer more after it does come back.

Diversity diminishes, and the human population decreases. It shifts the process of natural evolution. For hundreds of generations, our ancestors developed through a gradual process of changes from their ability to compete, survive, and reproduce. By hindering this process our specie will suffer. The negative outcomes are far greater than the positives. Maybe cloning can and will allow for possible answers for diseases and cures, however it still interferes with the natural order of life; the human life-cycle. We must put into consideration the time and money spent on the experiment with the cloned lamb. After years of several failed attempts prior to creating Dolly, can we, as humans, walk with a clean conscious knowing the amount of safety and harm caused toward a developing child-clone and those involved in the process (DNA holder, scientists, etc.)? This paints a clear picture of how cloning a human will be far more difficult, dangerous, and unethical. As a mother, I strongly oppose of this idea due to the consequences of how we, as a society will view these cloners, and how these cloners will affect my children’s lives. Will my children lead a normal life if they are deemed having a weak and undesirable DNA? Undoubtedly, a loss of individuality and diversity is created. Our genetic make-up is what makes us unique. It gives an individual a sense of self and distinctiveness. Eventually, the population starts to lack uniqueness. Two people wouldn’t be sitting down having a conversation on their diverse backgrounds, rather everyone else will have almost the same thoughts and ideas. How can a society grow and learn about all the

There are two types of cloning, one of them is reproductive cloning which is when a whole organism is cloned and therapeutic cloning is the cloning of cells, organs or tissues. Cloning is when two cells decide or are forced to duplicate into two cells to replicate each other. Cloning can be done deliberately or naturally; and it results in two copies having identical cells, DNA, genes, organs and organisms. Cloning is a common, ongoing, debatable topic among society today. Many people argue about how future scientific advances in cloning will affect society. Most often people dislike the idea of cloning because it goes against their ethical beliefs, or because they are in fear of it ending up in the wrong hands. But sometimes when the

In the creation of technological advances that survives today, the dispute of cloning is ever existent as a debate of morals and human rights. People are asking if we have the right to clone humans and other animals. Cloning, the process of taking a cell from one organism, taking a donor womb cell from another organism of the same species, inserting the original cell in the donor cell, and placing the newly developed embryo inside a surrogate mother. This is an inhumane desecration of human rights and an obscene act against the natural balance of life. There are those who think that cloning is a brilliant idea and that it is tolerable to create life from an individual which already exists. Those in support of cloning have countless reasons for their opinion. They say that clones and cloning can be used for medical and research purposes, that clones are capable of populating our military. Another reason for cloning is to replace a deceased child or pet, or to enable infertile couples to have children. But these people in support of cloning seem to ignore one key factor that makes this act a violation of nature. All living human beings have feelings and thoughts, and that also includes clones. Cloning belittles the individualities each person and animals acquires, and many consider it an ethical injustice.

Your dog dies, and your mom offers to get you a new one, but you don't want a new dog, you don't want a new dog like your old dog, you want your old dog. Cloning isn't the right answer, it's expensive, the clones are different from the original, and cloning doesn't always go the way scientists want it to.

In fact there are two types of cloning first is therapeutic cloning, second is reproductive cloning. Not to mention both of these meet the same standards on coning. The difference is Therapeutic cloning is done in a petri dish. Then there's reproductive cloning that is done when doctors get sperm cells and a woman's eggs and they combine them both to make a baby then the embryo is put back into the mother's womb so the baby can get all the right nutrients as the mother is getting. At this point they are asking donations from american tax paying dollars to fund the research for both of these experiments. I know that therapeutic cloning is not the best candidate to give money for further research because they are bringing a life to this world without giving it life. That is not the correct way to give a person a life. Knowing that you are christian let me know that you are for the bible and the thought of giving a person life should come from a mother not a petri dish.

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

Beginning with the moral argument, one must understand reproductive freedom. Most cloning activists say that reproduction, or the lack there of, is a natural freedom given to people (C). Restricting human cloning would be a violation of that right. Just as people can choose not to reproduce using contraception, abortion, or abstinence, people should be allowed to use all means possible within their ability to reproduce, such as through cloning and in vitro fertilization (C). Cloning is the application of this right specifically (C). Another benefit of cloning is the ability to clone someone who has died to console those who are grieving over their lost loved one or to clone the DNA of a person that was known for his of her greatness. Scientists would be able to recreate these people in a new environment (C). A clone's parent may have come from