Imagine a world where replacing a heart or liver as quickly as possible was as easy as shopping at the grocery store. A world where infertility was no longer a barrier in order to have a family. All of this, and much more, can be possible through using the cloning process on humans. This ability to duplicate an embryo is a power often considered as “Playing God”, thus frowned upon by most religions. Even though it is opposed by some out of fear of breaking either morale or human laws; human cloning grants many benefits including: medical advancement, help with infertility, and a stronger work force.
When the public thinks of cloning, they imagine an exact duplicate of a single human being. This is an image that has been influenced by media …show more content…
A popular belief is that a clone would be human, therefore it would have rights. As author Daniel Callahan, a proponent of cloning, stated in “Cloning: The Work Not Done”, “recognition of appropriate moral limits on scientific research”. Cloning certainly requires limits, but the extant of the restrictions can go based on two beliefs. On one hand to be a clone, it would be an exact duplicate of its donor, giving it all properties including a soul. On the other hand creation and birth are two different things. A creation has a creator, and is therefore owned, but something that comes into the world naturally has no owner; thus causing the question of what a clone is, and creating the opposition against cloning.
Cloning has been opposed by some with a passion so strong they felt the need to make a group to rally the general public against cloning. A poll stated that “60 percent of Americans opposed cloning” (Robertson). Since more than half of Americans believe that it is wrong: cloning will remain off limits. Groups including Gallup, The Americans to Ban Cloning coalition, and Friends of Earth. These organizations spread a false message against a solution to one of humanity’s greatest problems. Human cloning offers a way to humanly “grow” usable organs, but is being stamped out due to …show more content…
Advocate of human cloning, Amanda Tattum claims that “There is no morally significant difference between a fertilised egg in a petri dish in an IVF [in-vitro fertilisation] clinic, a cloned cell, and a skin cell: they could all be persons, with the application of modern technology". This statement could easily be manipulated to make the view-point that they are all pointless. The cloning process could help infertile couples by granting them with a child. In today’s time, technology is not powerful enough to allow for a perfect clone to be created, and the risk of multiple miscarriages could be more traumatic than not having the ability to reproduce. The process of cloning is simple; even though it can be risky with today’s
When the public thinks of cloning, they imagine an exact duplicate of a single human being. This is an image that has been influenced by media …show more content…
A popular belief is that a clone would be human, therefore it would have rights. As author Daniel Callahan, a proponent of cloning, stated in “Cloning: The Work Not Done”, “recognition of appropriate moral limits on scientific research”. Cloning certainly requires limits, but the extant of the restrictions can go based on two beliefs. On one hand to be a clone, it would be an exact duplicate of its donor, giving it all properties including a soul. On the other hand creation and birth are two different things. A creation has a creator, and is therefore owned, but something that comes into the world naturally has no owner; thus causing the question of what a clone is, and creating the opposition against cloning.
Cloning has been opposed by some with a passion so strong they felt the need to make a group to rally the general public against cloning. A poll stated that “60 percent of Americans opposed cloning” (Robertson). Since more than half of Americans believe that it is wrong: cloning will remain off limits. Groups including Gallup, The Americans to Ban Cloning coalition, and Friends of Earth. These organizations spread a false message against a solution to one of humanity’s greatest problems. Human cloning offers a way to humanly “grow” usable organs, but is being stamped out due to …show more content…
Advocate of human cloning, Amanda Tattum claims that “There is no morally significant difference between a fertilised egg in a petri dish in an IVF [in-vitro fertilisation] clinic, a cloned cell, and a skin cell: they could all be persons, with the application of modern technology". This statement could easily be manipulated to make the view-point that they are all pointless. The cloning process could help infertile couples by granting them with a child. In today’s time, technology is not powerful enough to allow for a perfect clone to be created, and the risk of multiple miscarriages could be more traumatic than not having the ability to reproduce. The process of cloning is simple; even though it can be risky with today’s