NOTE: Free essay sample provided on this page should be used for references or sample purposes only. The sample essay is available to anyone, so any direct quoting without mentioning the source will be considered plagiarism by schools, colleges and universities that use plagiarism detection software. To get a completely brand-new, plagiarism-free essay, please use our essay writing service.
One click instant price quote
Cloning The cloning of an adult sheep and the possibility that human cloning could soon follow has raised some serious ethical questions. Some people object on a purely ethical level while others favor cloning solely for the scientific advances it will produce. In the debate over cloning, there are those who say that the scientific benefits and advances gained from cloning are beneficial to society. On the other hand there are those who feel that cloning is morally wrong and would produce both scientific and social problems. Since ethics is not an exact science, whereas cloning is, ethics has the tendency to generate more controversies than answers (Huge's 12). As Huge's, the author of "Human Cloning: Should It Be, " pointed out, anything that does not make someone feel good may be unethical for them, but that doesn't make it illegal.
The ethical issue of cloning should not arise at all at this stage, because society is not there yet to venture in such a task without knowing all of the ramifications (Huge's 13). The issue, though, should not be left unattended either. It will be important for cloning to be researched under a well-monitored environment (Huge's 12). Unethical concerns at one time could later on become ethical only if society could justify the need to have use for them (Mario 13). What moral considerations deserve our attention and which are the most important in responding to a particular issue? These are questions that arise with every new controversy.
Whether one's ethical beliefs come from theological commitments, philosophical arguments, or from true-life experiences, all voices should be welcome to the conversation (Nash 80). All thoughtful views are entitled to a respectful hearing. Many people say that everyone in the world has a twin. Today, science and technology has the ability to make this myth reality through the process of cloning. There are many reasons in against cloning. People should not utilize cloning because it would destroy individuality and uniqueness, cause overpopulation, animal cruelty, it is against morals and ethics, and it violates many religious beliefs.
In order to strongly argue against cloning, there must be an understanding of its process and what exactly it is. Simply stated, a clone is a duplicate just like a photocopy. A good example of such copies that occur are identical twins, which are duplicates of each other. The first step of DNA cloning is to isolate a complete gene and is to chromosomal sequences and then to gradually begin flaking the chromosomal sequences of a single DAN molecule. Then the DNA clone can be electronically labeled and used as a probe to isolate the chromosomal sequences from a collection of different types of genes, which should contain cloned sequences that would represent the whole gene. This action will produce new sets of cloned cells identical to the mother cell.
The new set of cells are isolated and likewise the simplified process is repeated all over again until the cells form a complete organ. In order to produce a complete organism the DNA must be altered in a variety of way! to come out with the finished product to be the complete organism. In simple terms, a cell is taken from a donor woman.
Then an unfertilized egg is taken from a second woman. The DNA from the cell is removed and transferred to the egg. The egg is then implanted into a surrogate mother. The resulting baby is genetically identical to the original donor. Human cloning destroys individuality and uniqueness. What makes people unique is the fact that we have different genes and cloning would lose these important parts of our bodies makeup.
There would be less of a variety of people and everyone would be the same. This would not only be the good qualities, but also the bad that would pass on. Since clones and the original donor will look alike and have the same DNA, it would be nearly impossible to tell the difference. Overtime, they would lose their individuality and uniqueness. For example, say a crime was committed.
It would be impossible to know which one committed the crime. The biggest problem with cloning on a large scale is the decline in genetic diversity. Cloning will cause an increase in animal cruelty. It will be just another means of keeping animals unjustly enslaved and subject to pain for selfish human purposes. Animals should not be treated as objects. If cloning is made legal, it will cause overpopulation.
A shortage of food and water would occur that would have been needed to feed clones. There would also be a shortage of jobs and housing. Experts say that if scientists were to attempt today to clone a human being, there would probably be no legal barriers. Seppa (1997) reports that the National Bioethics Advisory Commission (NABC) concludes that it would be morally unacceptable for anyone in the public or private sector... to attempt to create a child by implanting cloned embryos in a woman.
Cloning has many benefits, but it also poses great risks to the human race. This report will show why cloning should be banned. Mckinnel (1979) reports that cloning has been around for decades and that scientists have known how to clone in principle for at least two decades. Scientists have been able to clone both plants and animals. They can grow a whole new plant from a fragment of an existing plant. Cloning has been used in agriculture to produce high quality uniform products.
Scientists have cloned frogs for scientific research. Gould (1997) reports that scientists from Scotland were able to clone a sheep from an adult cell. The sheep named Dolly is not the first mammal ever cloned. This is just one step closer to cloning humans. Plants and animals have been cloned for decades, but cloning poses great risks to humans. Cloning poses great risks to the human race.
Cloning may cause human bodies to stop aging. Then the world would become full of elderly immortals and few children. That would not be good for the world because the world needs the benefit of ideas from young people. Cloning could also cause people to become supernatural. Another risk to humans would be the threat of plagues. Plagues could develop as a result of cloning.
A worldwide epidemic unbalancing the ecology may also develop as a result of cloning. Seppa (1997) reports that the National Bioethics Advisory Commission has said that the technique used by the Scottish scientists to clone a sheep would pose great risks to humans. It was also reported by Seppa (1997) that Alta Chart said before successfully cloning a lamb, the researchers failed 277 times, producing many abnormal and still born animals. Cloning will not only pose great risks to the human race, but it will also raise moral and ethical issues. Cloning will raise moral and ethical issues. Seppa (1997) reported that anti-abortionists feel that life should start at conception.
Therefore they feel that cloning should be banned. If cloning does happen, there is a real potential for developmental abnormalities. Mckinnel (1979) reported that nature is imperfect and so is the potential synthetic human produced by cloning. Cloning humans raises moral issues.
Seppa (1997) reported that Ezekiel Emanuel said a child born of cloning would face an enormous weight of social and parental expectations about what and who that child should be. Cloning raises many moral and ethical issues, but cloning does have some benefits. Cloning has many benefits. Gould (1997) and Mckinnel (1979) both reported that cloning could be used for spare parts. Gould (1997) also reports that agencies could use cloning to make money. Cloning may be used to prolong life, maybe even make people live forever.
Mckinnel (1979) reports that cloning could eliminate genetic defects. If one individual in a marriage has a genetic defect, the partner without the defect could be cloned. Cloning may cause people to settle for the best existing animals, not allowing for improvement of the species. Because of this, cloning could potentially interfere with natural evolution. Any research into human cloning would eventually need to be tested on human.
The ability to clone humans may lead to the genetic tailoring of offspring. The heart of the cloning debate is concerned with the genetic manipulation of a human embryo before it begins development ("Ethical Aspects of Human Cloning" 7). It is conceivable that scientists could alter a baby's genetic code to give the individual a certain color of eyes or genetic resistance to certain diseases (Mario 6). This is viewed as inappropriate tampering with "Mother Nature" by many ethicist's. Because clones are derived from an existing adult cell, it has older genes. Will the clone's life expectancy be shorter because of this?
Despite this concern, so far, all clones have appeared to be perfectly normal creatures ("Ethical Aspects of Human Cloning" 3). A "genetic screening test" could be used to eliminate zygotes of a particular gender, without requiring a later abortion ("Cloning Supporters" 3). The genetic defect would be eliminated and the married couple could have children and not worry about a genetic defect. Mckinnel (1979) also reported that the acceptance of tissue transplants without rejection among members of the isogonic group is a possible benefit of cloning. Another benefit is that cloning may make it possible to preserve embryo cells or even produce embryo cells from other body cells. The cells could then be placed inside mothers to grow into human beings.
Then these living copies could be born when the first individual is old or dead. Even though here are benefits from cloning, all of these benefits involve risks. If scientists use cloning to clone spare parts, there would be risks to the surrogate mother who would carry the clone report Gould (1997). Gould (1997) also reported that agencies might abuse the clones. If cloning makes people live forever and the world becomes full of immortals and elderly people, then we wont have any young minds. If scientists preserve embryo cells and implant them in surrogate mothers when one individual is old or dead, that then poses a risk to the surrogate mother.
Eliminating a genetic defect by cloning also has risks. There are risks to the mothers health. Mckinnel (1979) reported that it is possible for fetal cells to break lose during the gestation and find their way into the mothers tissue. If the cloned cells get into her tissue they may become cancer and the mother could die of cancer related to her pregnancy. Even though there is some good that come out of cloning, cloning should still be banned. Attempts to create a human being by cloning should be banned.
Cloning does have some benefits, but it raises many moral and ethical issues. The National Bioethics Advisory Commission concludes that it would be morally unacceptable for anyone in the public or private sector... to attempt to create a child by implanting cloned embryos in women reports Seppa (1997). The principle of cloning has been known for at least two decades. Plants, such as apples and those in agriculture have been cloned to produce uniform and high quality products.
Frogs have also been cloned for scientific research. Dolly, the cloned sheep, is not the first mammalian clone. Dolly is the first clone from an adult cell. Cloning poses great risks to humans. The NABC concluded that the technique the Scots used to clone a sheep would be harmful to humans. Seppa (1997) reported that Alta Chart said before successfully cloning a lamb, the researchers failed 277 times, producing many abnormal and still born animals.
Those who believe cloning benefits should think about the risk cloning brings to the surrogate mother has in order to carry the clone. Cloning also brings a threat of plagues and superhuman creatures. An error or deliberate act could cause a worldwide epidemic by unbalancing the ecology. Cloning also raises moral and ethical issues. Seppa (1997) reported that Ezekiel Emanuel said a child born of cloning would face enormous social and parental expectations about what and who that child should be.
Anti-abortionists believe that life starts at conception and that cloning should be banned. Cloning should be banned for the reasons above. There is a real potential for developmental abnormalities. The risk of producing abnormal humans is dangerous to the human race and the moral and ethical issues will continue unless human cloning is banned. There are many things people believe are facts about cloning.
Those facts are only opinions and suggestions brought up from their imagination. Most of these cloning misconceptions arise from their lack of knowledge (Mario 8). Especially since people in general do not understand the basic principles of cloning, and are more likely to make rash generalizations about whether cloning is ethical or not ("Cloning Supporters" 3). Many of these misconceptions are only valid in a society without regulation or laws of any kind (Berg 413). Society often forgets that along with new technological developments come specific rules, regulations, and guidelines to prevent problems ("Ethical Aspects of Human Cloning" 7).
Cloning presents as much a moral problem as a technical problem. For society, cloning is an affront to religious sensibilities; it seems like "playing God, " and interfering with the natural process. There are, of course, more logical objections, regarding susceptibility to disease, expense, and diversity. Others are worried about the abuses of cloning. Even though there are a few positive things about cloning, the overall disadvantages show some serious outcomes that could possibly cause havoc in the future. If cloning should become scientifically acceptable, maybe some of the following thoughts should be taken into consideration.
Violation of the basic quality of uniqueness, loss of genetic diversity, not being able to know who is who, and to be considered morally wrong. Overall cloning comes into view as a powerful force that can be exploited to produce horrendous results. Words: 2311 Bibliography: Barr, Robert. "Cloning Raises Ethical Question in Scientific Community. " Pocono Record 5 Nov. 1997: D- 8. Berg, Paul, ET. AL. "Regulating Human Cloning. " Science 16 Oct. 1998: 413. "Cloning Supporters. " 1998 web (14 Oct. 1999). "Ethical Aspects of Human Cloning. " Feb. 1999 web (14 Oct. 1999). Goodman, Ellen. "Humans are not for Cloning. " Pocono Record 28 Feb. 1998: A- 10.
Huge's, J. "Human Cloning: Should it be. " web (14 Oct. 1999). Hughes, Gareth S. "The Ethics of Cloning. " web (14 Oct. 1999). "Human Cloning Proposals Rile Anti-abortion Groups. " Pocono Record 5 June 1997: A- 3. Mario, Christopher. "A Spark of Science a Storm of Controversy. " March 1997. web (26 Oct. 1999). "Mister poll. " web (21 Oct. 1999). Will, George. "Cloning Solves Biological Knot, Ties Complex Philosophical One. " Pocono Record 27 Feb. 1997: A- 8. Wilmut, Ian. "Dolly's False Legacy. " Time 11 Jan. 1999: 74 - 77.
Woodward, Kenneth L. "Today the Sheep. " Newsweek 10 March 1997: 60.
Free research essays on topics related to: cloning humans, genetic defect, morally unacceptable, national bioethics advisory, bioethics advisory commission
Research essay sample on Bioethics Advisory Commission National Bioethics Advisory
