Human Cloning: Favorable or Threat?
(WRITTEN FOR ENGLISH III SPEECH – 1st Draft)
Richard Nicholson of the British Bulletin of Medical Ethics said that cloning research may well be “sowing the seeds of our own destruction.”
Human cloning involves many social, moral, and ethical considerations. It may be useful to experiment with goats, pigs, deer, rabbits, rats, cats, mules, and horses clones, but the scenario of human cloning chills my enthusiasm. I would like to state my position: No to commercial human cloning, we have made enough mistakes, and I am personally not ready for such trials of my humanity. Human cloning is perverse, abnormal, unhealthy and unnecessary. Unnecessary because it is an unjustifiable waste of human and material resources and efforts have statistically high failure rates. The more failures, the more it becomes less attractive those who want to be Nobel Prize winners. Human cloning is similar to nuclear weapons, dangerous in the hands of potential terrorist clones, controversial issue that is one of the hottest debatable subjects. I have studied websites to find out what people think of a designer human being. The opinions are divided. According to the survey conducted and has been posted on the website, some people are for human cloning as an emotional compensation for our lives’ naturally ending in deaths; others are horrified with this unhealthy idea.
Cloning is considered the great medical breakthrough of our age. As the definition says clones are copies of another human’s physical look or what he/she likes to eat, but a person’s whole personality is based on the experiences in his/her life and there is no method of cloning that can copy the personality of the host. There are medical disadvantages in human cloning, which make the benefits less effective. It was first thought that stem cells could only be harvested from embryos, but today’s researchers are finding that any human cell can be manipulated to replace any tissue of the body.
Health risks from mutation of genes – an abnormal baby would be a nightmare comes true. The technique is extremely risky right now. A particular worry is the possibility that the genetic material used from the adult will continue to age so that the genes in a newborn baby clone could be – say – 30 years old or more on the day of birth. Many attempts at animal cloning produced disfigured monsters with severe abnormalities. So that would mean creating cloned embryos, implanting them and destroying those that look imperfect as they grow in the womb.
One of the major disadvantages of cloning is on ethics, which is center of debates. The concept of cloning is hurting a lot of human sentiments and human beliefs. There are controversies on whether cloning is ethical or not. The controversy is storming the world and took a great shape. The whole world seems to get divided in the issues relating to cloning. The Christianity as well as Judaism does not support the destruction of embryo or the creation of artificial human being.
Human life on the Earth relies on the diversity of genes. And the diversity of genes come from parents having different sets of genes. The most horrendous part of identical genes is that it will weaken our power and adaptations, which make us subjected to great diseases easily. In addition, human cloning is just copying the identical genes, which means it will decrease the diversity of genes.
Furthermore, the beauty of humanity lies in the differences we see in each other. Cloning would eliminate surprise and predict expectancy.
The clergymen opined human cloning is playing the role of god. Bishop of Catholic Albert Moraczewski mentioned that the power that God gives humans is over the fish, the birds, and all animals, domestic and wild, large and small. (Genesis, chapter1, verse 26). Adam and Eve have all the power, except they cannot eat the fruit of the tree that gives knowledge of what is good and what is bad. If they do so, they will die. So, Albert Moraczewski believes that human cloning is out of the God’s permission. There is no evidence that proves humans have the right to change God’s will.
Human cloning transgresses nature, because it is not via the natural reproductive process, which is by a man and a woman. Human cloning is creating life.
A clone makes no differences as us. A clone must eat, drink and carry out any other metabolic processes in order to survive. The clone may even be better than his original host. It would be inhumane to treat them as ‘special species’. If human is cloned, this will turn us to be a property which can be sold to anybody else. In other words, selling humans is unethical, inhumane and immoral.
The basic concept of a family is a couple falls in love and determines to care each other. Then the couple may decide to have children which they will love them dearly. But parents of clones might value their children according to how much they look like to themselves. Cloning, as a result, undermine the basic elements of loving, nurturing family and to accept each child as a unique individual.
Cloning may arouses social side effects. It is ridiculous that reproduction is separated from love and other human relationship. The entire world may use cloning for eugenics that would lead to efforts to selectively breed children who are of more intelligent, heavier and extraordinary.
As mentioned above, in human cloning, all human beings will be identical. Which means that entire human is at a risk of getting infected by the same type of pathogen. In scientific point of view, if everyone has the same type of genes and they are closed to each other they may not defend against the same kind of serious disease. Then cloning will be detrimental in terms of a great disaster.
Another negative effect of cloning is inbreeding, as everyone has the same genotype and keep reproducing among themselves. This would lead us to our own extinction.
Would you support the idea of cloning yourself? Why are investors moving away from human cloning?
California was the first state to ban reproductive cloning. Arkansas, Connecticut, Indiana, Iowa, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Rhode Island, and some others followed it. Arizona and Missouri have restrictions on the use of public funds for cloning. Maryland prohibits the use of state stem cell research funds for reproductive cloning. Several states ban therapeutic cloning and cloning for research purposes. Virginia prohibits the possession of the product of human cloning.
Human cloning is not clearly defined as a human being. It is a created human life whose nucleus was transferred from a human cell. This unclear definition is purposeful, since it does not say directly whether a human clone is like us or not. I do not know why, but for me human cloning is associated with another creature of the same kind that would completely lack morality and ethics.
Posted on March 4, 2010, in Society and tagged cloning, controvesy, copy, disadvantages, English, essay, ethics, host, human, Nicholson, personality, religion, Richard, speech. Bookmark the permalink. 15 Comments.