The Ethical Implications Of Human Cloning

The surrogate mother will ultimately give birth to an identical twin to the donor of the somatic cell (“The Process of Cloning”). This process allows people to clone living things of any sort.

Imagine if you lived in a world where everyone was the same and had no physical differences. Everyone would have the exact same DNA. There would be no diversity within the population. If we continue to clone then this may be a possibility for the future. As of now there have been no cloned humans, but we are not too far away from being able to do so. Scientists have been cloning since as early as 1886, and have been cloning animals since 1996 with the birth of Dolly the sheep. Dolly the sheep was created by using reproductive cloning which is used to produce copies of whole animals (Cloning Fact Sheet NHGRI). Furthermore, there are two other types of cloning; therapeutic cloning and gene cloning. Therapeutic cloning is used to produce embryonic stem cells for medical research (Cloning Fact Sheet NHGRI). Gene cloning is used to produce copies of genes or segments of DNA (Cloning Fact Sheet NHGRI). Cloning should not be allowed because it is inhumane and unethical, results in more failure than it does results, and is unfeasible.

Unlike some movies, cloning in real life doesn’t produce a full grown exact replica of someone. A type of cloning that occurs naturally is when identical twins are born (“What Is Cloning?”). Somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT) is a type of cloning that has to be done in a lab. In SCNT they take the nucleolus out of an egg cell, replace it with the nucleolus of a somatic cell (body cell with two complete sets of chromosomes), and make the egg cell divide into a blastocyst (“What Is Cloning?”).

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.

All organisms on this planet evolved from a single cell. That single cell eventually developed into complex organisms with a billion cells. Insects, birds, apes, and the person that sits next to you on the bus every morning, are all very closely related… to you, but what makes a human distinctive from all the other organisms on this planet? Humans are unique in their own way because they have evolved to perform extraordinary and assorted tasks. Humans are meant to have flaws, and they are meant to be diverse, but a relatively new advancement contradicts the definition of being human. For many years the world has had to deal with a controversial topic of cloning. Cloning is an exact, precise copy of an organism (“Cloning”). Even though cloning provides many benefits, human cloning is not ethical because it will cost a tremendous amount of money and time. Cloning will also destroy evolution, and finally each and every human, even a clone, deserves a sense of individuality.

In recent years, cloning has been a controversial topic, being highly debated by scientists, politicians, and philosophers alike while invigorating popular culture through works such as Star Wars or Aldous Huxley 's’ Brave New World (Brock E-3). However, the fantastical examples of cloning to increase labor supply or selective cloning to create a caste system as these works depict, are highly irrelevant to problems society faces today with the prospect of cloning. Current medical technology suggests that cloning may be a new alternative to adoption or natural reproduction for couples that may have medical complications in pregnancy and birth, or couples that may be unable to conceive entirely.Yet, because this technology is so new, and admittedly, in an early, undeveloped stage, legislations or established moral standards are still fairly non-existent, making it essential that certain boundaries be formed. Subsequently, this paper will attempt to do so by suggesting and justifying that cloning be permitted and considered morally permissible as a means for reproduction. In this, works by D.Brock, C.Strong, E. Berg, L.Kass, and T.Takala will be used to argue that the overall benefits relative to health would outweigh any possible counter arguments against the use of reproductive cloning as an alternative to natural reproduction.

The issue at hand is that scientists are in a period of enlightenment with the human genome and with no standard line of ethics pertaining to editing human embryos in research development other countries are taking liberty to beat around the bush to explore this concept of eugenics. After the cloning of dolly the goat and China cloning two monkeys without a genetic blood disease through a process called CISPR society are asking the same question. Are scientists taking this too far before it is ready? Anyone who plans on reproducing or has genetic diseases in their family may want to consider a side in this debate because they may find themselves with the option of “editing” their baby with the ideal gene pool. This issue is prevalent because the entire world is tempering with human genes and is working towards introducing a whole new set of humans by this technology. Gene manipulation is an important topic because of the ethical and spiritual beliefs that it challenge. Changing genetic material to where there is no disease would affect the entire next population of humans and their future children. While scientists now know how to change our physical traits and handicaps they cannot take out traits like ambitiousness which is what makes manipulating the human genome so dangerous. The risks is that this chase for curing disease could turn into a quest for the ideal human where in the future parents can grocery shop their child or countries can create the ultimate human race.

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

Reproductive cloning has been up for debate for many years. The problem resides in the morality of cloning a human being. Reproductive cloning to produce animals has been around for a number of years, but the ability to clone a human is a more recent reality. Reproductive cloning is a new area of science that we barely know anything about. As a society we do not know if reproductive cloning is safe. We don’t know if it is like we are playing God. We don’t even know what the end result would be for reproductive cloning because it has never been successful for humans. Until we know more and it becomes safer, reproductive cloning for humans is immoral.

Cloning has been around since 1952 when Robert Briggs and Thomas King externally fertilized and developed a leopard frog using somatic cell nuclear transfer. Though scientists had discussed the need for communication about the ethical ramifications of cloning since as early as 1972, it was not until the successful cloning of a sheep named Dolly in 1997 that cloning came to the forefront of scientific and societal discussion. As a result of the continuity of fast-paced scientific discovery, the issues surrounding cloning of both animals and humans remain a hot topic, with people divided on both sides of the controversy.

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

the right to have a child as long as the child born is unharmed. Some

Although there are some important benefits to the use of human cloning, there are also moral challenges as well. The benefits include eradicating defective genes and infertility and a quicker recovery from traumatic injuries among other advantages. However, the disadvantages are truly thought provoking as first an individual must answer the question, “When does a human life begin?” This paper will oppose the use of human cloning on the basis that life begins at conception and therefore the use of human embryos should be restricted or forbidden.

Human cloning is a topic surrounded in controversy. There is yet to be an instance of a successfully cloned human, despite several attempts (Cloning Fact Sheet, 2017). Time, money and resources have been spent in these trials, but whether or not we as human beings and God’s children should even be attempting to make carbon copies of another human is an important question. Cloning is wrong ethically and theologically. It is as if humans are intervening in natural creation and playing God, it can develop new diseases and scientific challenges that never before existed and clones would serve very little real purpose in society.