The Cloning Of Humans: Creating Man Isn’T Just For God Anymore Essay, Research Paper
Imagine yourself walking down the street, forty or fifty years from now. Everything is normal, there people walking to their destinations. You continue to walk your way, minding your own business, when all of a sudden you realize you are see a lot of the same people more than once. You just take it to mean that there are a lot of people walking in circles. As your day continues you see more and more of the same people. Meeting up with one of your friends you asks, “hey, lately, have you noticed that everyone looks like everyone else?” Your friend looks at you with disbelief, “haven’t you been paying attention to the news, and the papers? Everyone, that can afford it, is getting cloned.”
The recent cloning of a sheep has people debating the pluses and minuses of that kind of research. Now the debate has changed to whether or not to clone humans. The pros and cons of this project are both important and have to be considered. A lot of people are strongly against this “playing God”. In some cases the cloning should be considered. The cloning should only be used to help infertile couples to have children and to find cures for diseases. What would be the point of cloning a model, a singer, or movie star.
Religious leaders and ethical philosophers oppose such human experiments. There is the danger of people playing God, mankind is another step closer to wielding the powers of God. For those who aren’t born multiples, there isn’t supposed to be another like them. The religious opinion on cloning to cure diseases is a not clear. Would that be qualified as playing God? Should scientist not try to cure Parkinson’s or Alzheimer’s? I do believe that God wants for the sick to be helped.
The scientific arguments against human cloning were based on the results of animal trials in which mice, the infamous cloned sheep Dolly, and other mammals developed all kinds of unpredictable genetic defects. The potential represented by cloning does not automatically outweighs the risk of unseen con-sequences. There are enough people in this world without “making” more. Maybe they should be more interested in cloning needed things like food. If cloning is completely outlawed then there will probably be no hope for finding the cures for those fore-mentioned diseases. Some scientists don’t agree and feel that: without terminal sicknesses and diseases the world would be greatly overcrowded.
There are two sexes, to keep our population alive, if we would clone humans, there would be no more need for men. That comment is true as far as reproduction is concerned, intercourse would be strictly for “fun”. Men will still need to be father figures, and take responsibility for the child.
The US House of Representatives voted last week for a total ban on human cloning, complete with prison sentences for offenders. President Bush agrees. The Italian government has threatened to take away the medical licence of Dr Severino Antinori if he goes ahead with his plans to begin reproducing humans through cloning. Scientists who are experimenting with cloning animals report serious problems with the process. Dr. Rudolf Jaenisch of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, who has cloned mice in his laboratory states, “I think at this stage we just do not know all the ins and outs. I think the extent of the problem which we have, at this time to say we?re looking at three different genes, then we conclude the embryo is normal, I think this is not good science.” (van Wagdendonk)
The pros of human cloning go a long way. The most popular argument for cloning is that it will provide better control of some genetic illnesses. Bone marrow transplants will become obsolete, along with other transplants: heart, lung, kidney, and liver transplants. Cloning is expected to improve the overall quality of life and science and add to the increased understanding of genetics. It can also prevent genetic diseases and other diseases from being passed from parent to child.
In order for a decision to be made about the definite effects of cloning, there should be experiments. True, that experiments are being done, but there are so many different opinions being made about whether the outcome is positive or negative. There should be one major case study done to determine whether the effects or pros or cons. If during cloning children don’t fully develop, then parents should be notified of these dangers and whether or not these things actually happen.
Cloning humans just because we can is not a respectable thing or smart thing to do. There should only be two uses for cloning: to help in infertility problems and to help cure diseases and other medical problems. Forty of fifty years from now in the countries that haven’t yet outlawed cloning, there will be a lot of multiples walking around if the scientists do want they want and clone normal everyday people. There might also be a lot of happy families as a result of embryo cloning. The diseases for which there aren’t any cures at this time could quite possibly be cured. The overpopulation of the earth seems a little less important than the happiness brought by children and health. So human cloning may be a very beneficial thing.
“Ban Baby Cloning, says Royal Society.” BBC News 19 Jun. 2001.
Lauritsen, Paul, ed. Cloning and the Future fo Human Embryo Research . New York: Oxford University Press, 2001.
Wagdendonk, Reinout van. “Cloning Debate Splits Scientists.” World Hot Spots. 08 Aug. 2001. Radio Netherlands. 20 Nov. 200l .