Essay about Argument Against Human Cloning
1902 Words8 Pages
In 1997, the first clone of a sheep named Dolly was created. This embryo had a success rate of one to four percent. When applied to humans, this percentage may decrease and become lower and more unpredictable. With lives at stake, is it worth the risk of the embryos involved in the unstable process? Although cloning may allow for new medical procedures and research of diseases and cures, it takes away from the natural biological order of life, and allows humans to "play God" while creating a margin of error which could result in many defects. 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…show more content…
In 1997, President Clinton proposed a moratorium on cloning that would not allow funding by the government. A bill was also presented in the Senate in 2001 that would legally ban cloning regardless of its funding, whether it was federal or private. The repercussions of infringement on this law "would be up to ten years in jail and a fine of up to $10 million" (A). Human cloning proposes many arguments for each opposing side and can greatly impact the modern world based upon the research obtained through it. Whether or not that research is morally and ethically correct is the topic of most discussions in the genetics field. 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
Cloning in general has been a rising debate across the globe since before Dolly the sheep was cloned in 1996. The success of being able to clone an animal brought scientists to wonder about a more challenging task, cloning humans. This consideration is morally wrong and should not be stood for. Some people seem not to realize the negative aspects that cloning would bring into a world which is already suffering. Religious standpoints, the growth of the population, and each human’s individuality are just a few of the supporting reasons that stand against cloning and support why it should not be legalized. Simply because there are a few factors that make some in favor of cloning does not rectify the atrocity that it would bring.
One supporter that stands for cloning, Simon Smith, states that it would be useful to produce clones for fertility reasons such as infertile couples and couples carrying a genetic disease. This seems reasonable; however, there are other options available that are better suitable. Adoption, artificial insemination, and other successful surgeries are more appropriate, currently available alternatives. It seems questionable as to whether a person wanting to produce a clone offspring of themselves would be corrupt or unprincipled in wanting to do so. Wanting to make a replica of yourself would be a shameless act.
There are supporters in favor of cloning such as Professor Robert Winston to make note that cloning would be an option available to those people who have lost a loved one. Have we forgotten our virtues and that with the birth of life, one day will come death? The structure of living and dying applies to every species. It’s not something most humans look forward to for themselves or for anyone they love but inevitably one day it will approach us all.
This is the reason living things are given the ability to reproduce, to give life to the future. It’s a choice given, but not one we all have to choose. The personalities of humans and other creatures is what makes you care for them and produce a bond, not their physical appearance. Having a replica only identical in image and not in personality would not bring back a lost loved one; on the contrary, it could make it even harder for some people to cope and deal with.
Individuality is another factor to consider when thinking of the outcome cloning would bring. This is what makes our world so unique, if clones become produced, we will lose that uniqueness. Having human clones in existence would be an insult to human kind and the distinctiveness of every human being. It would change what it means to be human. If life can be formed in various ways other than the ways intended, how can it have that special value that being human has? Clones could likely end up as another minority fighting for equal rights. Could you imagine what it might feel like to know that you were a clone of someone else’s being? Would you feel inferior to human life and all that it brings? Would you even have a soul? These are all questions that society puts aside that should attempt to be answered.
The growing population in the United States and in other countries around the world is also a very important element to consider. Although it would be great to have the fountain of youth, it does not seem very effective. People have to die; otherwise the population would be a greater concern than it currently is. If people were living an extra fifty years or more, the world would become chaotic. Citizens of the U.S. already have to fight for there entitlements they should receive as elders. Prolonging the life of humans would eventually become the cause of their extinction. We consume far too many resources that we need to survive and are doing far too little to replenish them. Trees will become a thing of the past in the not so distant future. Without this mankind cannot survive due to the lack of oxygen. This along with the extinction of other natural resources will only cause the human race to diminish.
Scientists after a period of time could even possibly evolve clones to be the ideal human race. The DNA to produce clones could be manipulated after advance research to make them have specific characteristics and possibly mind-set as well. They could possibly be made to have a particular function in life such as becoming an Olympic swimmer or even a killing machine in the army, programmed to go off to war. What Hitler was trying to accomplish during the Holocaust could become reality if clones were to be created. It has been proposed that in the not too distant future, cloning technologies could advance to the level where they could even recreate a deceased individual in the adult form. They could likely even recreate there past memories and experiences. There doesn’t seem to be any ethical concerns for this, as twisted as the thought of it turns out to be.
Everything happens for a purpose and for that reason alone cloning is wrong and should not be legalized. The saying goes, if it’s not broke, don’t fix it. This saying should apply to cloning just as well. The vast majority of humans are perfectly capable of reproducing offspring; therefore there is no reason to clone. Along with the scientific accomplishments it would bring to man kind many down falls would follow only shortly behind. It may seem like many advantages could take place in the scientific community if cloning were to be legalized, but only resulting in having only a few benefits and many downfalls. The possible outcomes that would exist in its legalization does not make it being performed morally right.
Smith, Simon. “HumanCloning.org.” 2002. Human Cloning Foundation. 22 March2007.
Winston, Robert. “The Promise of Cloning for Human Medicine.” British Medical Journal (1997):913-14. 21 March.