Arguments Against Cloning

     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.

Animal cloning is happening in today's society, people are split on either side that it is a big step into human race future, or if it is a part of science that humans shouldn’t be a part of. Cloning is done by removing a cell, then transfer the DNA into the egg of a donor, the animal would then grow up to look like the original. Cloning by humans is not the only way to clone, asexual reproduction is considered cloning used by bacteria. Humans consider the fact that you have a twin means that you have clone. So there are the facts to take in that cloning has been happening for a long time and that it is also done naturally. The big issue on animal cloning is more on the fact that many birth defects can happen to the cloned animal because it is such a high percentage. Clones that have defects such as two heads or extra body parts do have a small chance to live to the adult age. On the other side humans see cloning as a way of survival, with testing done on animals we could look back into the past and bring extinct animals from it. Many home pets have been cloned properly to look like an exact replica of the original, but the personality is the key difference between both. With experiments we now know cloning can be beneficial in some ways, but there is always a draw back. Another con to cloning is that it reduces the diversity in genetics, since cloning is using exact genes it has the potential to limit diversity in the species, there may be a time where organisms will no longer breed naturally. But the con that most people think of is that one day, humans would be able to clone themselves. This scenario is more of a moral dilemma because it is not natural and goes against many people and what they believe in, the fear comes from the movies and books because no human has ever been cloned, and then the wars will start because the fear of death would no longer be there. This is all just one side of the issue, the pro side looks for advancements to benefit humans. Cloning can help produce the best animal population with healthy genes. This could mean that humans can keep endangered animals from becoming extinct, this also means that with the raw material

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

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.

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 we have the state of the art technologies and the result of a successful cloning of the infamous lamb known as Dolly, should we take the next step and begin human cloning? If I were to carry the super DNA that scientists are wanting to explore in the lab, would I allow myself to be duplicated? Absolutely not! Replicating a human is not only wrong on ethical grounds but also a threat to our existence! The biggest concern is how far will humans attempt to control nature? Therefore, I do not believe that cloning should be allowed based on my teleological outlook.

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

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

Before the ethics of human cloning can be discussed, the mechanics of cloning must be understood first. Cloning is the process of making an exact genetic copy of an organism by a method called nuclear transplantation which is a process of removing a nucleus (the center of a cell which contains all of the biological information)

Some politicians in the United States are now proposing to save us from the horrors of human cloning by a comprehensive prohibition. The interesting thing is that under close analysis there really aren't any serious problems. In the few cases where abuses are likely to occur, these can be avoided by targeted legislation. There is nothing about human cloning per se that justifies its criminalization. The only objection that stands up under analysis is that the technology has not been perfected. This is a justification for further research, not for a prohibition.

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

When people talk about cloning the bible is usually taken out on a person that is for cloning. Religion now a day has just decided to pretty much ignore the topic and forget about it. If humans were cloned they say that there would be a huge inbreeding problem and the world will start having even more population than what is necessary. Cloning is pretty much just a huge issue without an end; it’s something that you can argue on and on about.

Scientific experimentation has led us to many great discoveries such as: Chemotherapy, heart surgery, and bone marrow transplants. Recently scientists have discovered a new way to heal humans. This is known as cloning. Although they have yet to clone a human they have cloned sheep. Cloning has brought up a huge controversy among the American people. There are two sides to the story. Either you agree with cloning or you don’t. The only way to help make that decision is to look at the good and bad points of cloning.