The Ethics of Cloning
What makes something ethical? A process or action is considered ethical if it is in accordance with the accepted rules for behavior (Merriam-Webster Dictionary). Based on this definition one can determine if a process or action is considered ethical. Cloning is an ethical process that is life changing for individuals that suffer from genetic diseases, spinal cord injuries, infertility, and organ failure.
Cloning used to eliminate genetic diseases, reconstruction of spinal cords, infertility problems, and the production of organs for patients are ethically sound. In the essay “The Benefits of Human Cloning”, Simon Smith refers to restraining and debilitating diseases such as Tay-Sachs and Cystic Fibrosis. These terrible …show more content…
People with conservative religious morals could find it unacceptable to perform cloning because they would consider the act as playing God (Reasons For and Against Cloning). According to Joseph Farnsworth, the American Medical Association has four reasons on why cloning should not take place. The reasons are: “1) there are unknown physical harms introduced by cloning, 2) unknown psychosocial harms introduced by cloning, including violations of autonomy and privacy, 3) impacts on familial and societal relations, and 4) potential effects on the human gene pool” (Farnsworth). Another ethical question involving cloning would be whether the clones would have human rights. Phil for Humanity talks about this idea that we would create a these docile humans with super strength and a low-intelligence. These clones would then be forced into slavery because they are copies with no …show more content…
For instance, if someone is hit by a car and has punctured a lung. They cannot breathe and are slowly slipping into unconsciousness. An EMT is on the scene and uses a breathing apparatus to help the victim breathe and stay conscious while being driven to the hospital. There the doctors can patch up the victim so they can breathe on their own or they are hooked up to a machine that helps them breathe. The victim should have died from having a punctured lung. This could be considered playing God, because the person was supposed to die, but because of the EMT and the doctor together they were able to save a life. Doctors save lives everyday through situations like these and more mild cases such as giving diabetics insulin. Without the insulin injections or pumps the diabetic patient would die. These reasons against cloning from the American Medical Association have some depth to them, however, they are excluding the simpler benefits cloning can have on people’s lives. Also the first statement uses the word “unknown” and since most things in science use to be unknown the subject should be studied more, until a more certain conclusion. As for clones not having human-rights or the possibility of them becoming enslaved has a lot more to do with the morals of the United States than the ethics of cloning all
What makes something ethical? A process or action is considered ethical if it is in accordance with the accepted rules for behavior (Merriam-Webster Dictionary). Based on this definition one can determine if a process or action is considered ethical. Cloning is an ethical process that is life changing for individuals that suffer from genetic diseases, spinal cord injuries, infertility, and organ failure.
Cloning used to eliminate genetic diseases, reconstruction of spinal cords, infertility problems, and the production of organs for patients are ethically sound. In the essay “The Benefits of Human Cloning”, Simon Smith refers to restraining and debilitating diseases such as Tay-Sachs and Cystic Fibrosis. These terrible …show more content…
People with conservative religious morals could find it unacceptable to perform cloning because they would consider the act as playing God (Reasons For and Against Cloning). According to Joseph Farnsworth, the American Medical Association has four reasons on why cloning should not take place. The reasons are: “1) there are unknown physical harms introduced by cloning, 2) unknown psychosocial harms introduced by cloning, including violations of autonomy and privacy, 3) impacts on familial and societal relations, and 4) potential effects on the human gene pool” (Farnsworth). Another ethical question involving cloning would be whether the clones would have human rights. Phil for Humanity talks about this idea that we would create a these docile humans with super strength and a low-intelligence. These clones would then be forced into slavery because they are copies with no …show more content…
For instance, if someone is hit by a car and has punctured a lung. They cannot breathe and are slowly slipping into unconsciousness. An EMT is on the scene and uses a breathing apparatus to help the victim breathe and stay conscious while being driven to the hospital. There the doctors can patch up the victim so they can breathe on their own or they are hooked up to a machine that helps them breathe. The victim should have died from having a punctured lung. This could be considered playing God, because the person was supposed to die, but because of the EMT and the doctor together they were able to save a life. Doctors save lives everyday through situations like these and more mild cases such as giving diabetics insulin. Without the insulin injections or pumps the diabetic patient would die. These reasons against cloning from the American Medical Association have some depth to them, however, they are excluding the simpler benefits cloning can have on people’s lives. Also the first statement uses the word “unknown” and since most things in science use to be unknown the subject should be studied more, until a more certain conclusion. As for clones not having human-rights or the possibility of them becoming enslaved has a lot more to do with the morals of the United States than the ethics of cloning all