Human Cloning Controversy

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

Cloning is “the creation of exact copies of a gene, cell, or entire organism” (“Cloning”). Many objects can be cloned such as plants and cells. The topic of cloning becomes controversial when the focus is toward humans. It is evident that cloning of other species and organisms is possible. Because of this, the thought of human cloning has arisen in the science community within the previous few centuries. According to a poll produced by Time Magazine, ninety-three percent of American’s are opposed to human cloning (“Human Cloning”). This proves that the advancement of this topic has developed far beyond our wisdom. If nearly one hundred percent of the population disagrees with even the idea of this experiment, it is evident that they are unaware of the ways in which this technology has advanced. Furthermore, this unpredictable outcome of cloning will be irreversible. “Whatever effects cloning might have, cloning would be like opening Pandora’s Box, because there would be no way to turn back once the technology was developed and in use” (“Human Cloning”). As has been noted, the science of human cloning is not yet understood therefore it has advanced far too quickly for society to

Patrick D. Hopkins explains how the pathological motives of the cloner could be unpredictable (1). The technology behind cloning could get into the wrong hands and be used for the wrong reasons very easily. “It is not surprising that people who desire cloning - who by definition want to copy themselves or others are considered misguided” (Hopkins,4). Someone could clone the embryo of their child and give birth to the same person years after the first, or someone could give birth to their own cloned embryo in the future, we can only imagine the problems and even emotional disturbances this could cause. “I think that we all have the right to our individual genetic identity, and this could very well violate that right” (Callahan, 3). The intentional creation of genetic replicas could deny someone their

Genetic cloning is one of the most controversial topics of all time. People, specifically scientists, are constantly searching for ways to improve the quality of human life. As a result, they began genetically engineering animals and are currently in search of a method to genetically engineer humans as well; which is called human cloning. There are many reasons why people should not go forward with this step since genetic cloning, consequently human cloning, does not respect nature nor does it ensure diversity and survival in natural ecosystems. In addition, genetic cloning is a cruel, harsh, and an unsafe experiment.

Human cloning is described as “the creation of a genetically identical copy of a human.” Although human cloning has no record of being successful, cloning was demonstrated to be possible when scientists Sir Ian Wilmut and the rest of their research team successfully cloned Dolly, a sheep (Wilmut 12). This demonstration opened up a new area of science ready to be explored. If animals can be cloned, can human beings be cloned too? If successful, scientists would be able to clone human copies and further advance modern medicine, such as using cells for regenerative medicine or harvesting organs for transplants. It is also possible that other fields of medicine and research can be furthered with this supply of human clones. Additionally, couples incapable of reproducing can pursue cloning to create an offspring with their DNA. However, human cloning has never been successful and comes with ethical concerns.The clone can suffer from abnormalities. There are also concerns regarding the treatment of embryos to gather stem cells and the treatment of clones as a person. By further investigating and analyzing this topic through the lens of Catholic moral tradition, I hope to make clear the pros and cons of the subject while also evaluating them with an ethical theory learned from this quarter in order to add to the discussion.

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.

The concept of human cloning has constantly blended a debate, raising moral and ethical issues. There are many aspects involving human cloning that would be brought upon us which would affect us negatively, and would be considered morally wrong. Religious Standpoints, the development of the populace, and every human's distinction are a couple of the supporting reasons that remain against cloning and bolster why it ought not be legalized. The revelation of cloning has turned into and issue of science progression as well as an issue of whether people are doing the right thing by continuing the examination on human cloning.

To introduce the relevance of both his and Ishiguro’s work, he quickly summarizes the political and scientific history of clones in the early twenty first century, thus presenting the ethical debate of creating life for scientific organ harvest. While Jerng admits that the National Bioethics Advisory Commission (NBAC) and President’s Council on Bioethics (PCBE) prohibited cloning, he suggests the fluidity of opinion regarding clones, especially with familial context. When presented as an option to give grieving parents another opportunity with their dead child or to supply extra organs for the insurance of the health of the population, cloning children viewed as a valid, ethical option. However, Jerng warns that the “emphasis on the traditional family installs a normative narrative of individuation that closes off models of what it means to be human” (374). Because cloning threatens individuality, a traditional family cannot be sustained because parents will not treat the cloned child as their own biological child. As a result, the idea of whether clones are “whole” individuals becomes significant in determining their

On February 27, 1997, it was reported that scientists produced the first clone of an adult sheep, attracting international attention and raising questions on the morality of cloning. Within days, the public had called for ethics inquires and new laws banning cloning. Issues are now raised over the potentially destructive side of this scientific frontier. Many people are morally opposed to the possible consequences of women being able to give birth to themselves, or scientists seeking to clone "genetically superior" humans. Others argue that the positive effects of cloning will outweigh the negative. The issue over whether cloning humans is ethical is receiving more and more attention as scientists successfully

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

Many people have asked, "Why would anyone want to clone a human being?" There are at least two good reasons: to allow families to conceive twins of exceptional individuals, and to allow childless couples to reproduce. In a free society we must also ask, "Are the negative consequences sufficiently compelling that we must prohibit consenting adults from doing this?" We will see that in general they are not. Where specific abuses are anticipated, these can be avoided by targeted laws and regulations, which I will suggest below.

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

As the advancement of time, the concept of human cloning can become a reality as with the breakthrough of biotechnology. Human cloning can be defined in terms of formation of genetically same imprint of an individual. The child who produced from this process is a new category of human being that is a clone of a person who cloned himself. Many people think that it is not right to cloned human beings. People argued that it is wrong to create identical human being, and this argument is dismissed by stating various other arguments in the favor of human cloning such as there is nothing wrong if monozygotic twins exist, and clone is not the identical copy of the original human being even in those situations where clone is exact genetic copy because those clones are developed in a completely different environment. In this paper, I will discuss the life in shadow argument as well as arguments opponent to it. In addition, I will discuss the ethical considerations of human reproductive cloning regarding this