Dr Merrick Analysis

No. We disagree with Dr. Merrick’s justification.
This is because human clone is living things. The human clone would be every bit as much a human being. The act of Dr. Merrick is an act of murdering another living things, it is as much as if you had killed a random stranger. Besides, the successful clone would probably have a very drastic life. As it may be cloned by an adult so he or she will have a shorter lifetime. The human clone will not have the same human rights and will be discriminated by society because people will consider him or her as an experiment, not as a normal human being that has feelings. Just because someone who was not born in a lab needs a heart we need to create a human just to cut their life short. Humans should be created through an act of love and not an act of science.
Secondly, it is immoral. We are messing with nature. It looks like we are trying to eliminate the need for reproduction. We are able to have sex because we have to reproduce. Human life is precious and sacred. We are created in the image of God, and therefore the idea of cloning is repulsive to us since it puts the "cloner" in the place of God. When a person is cloned, it's generally to achieve some genetic standard rather than what's more …show more content…
If the organs of clones were harvested, nothing would happen. Who protects them? They were not given the rights to choose their own choices. Clones will be grown to produce "spare parts" for other people, or to be used for medical research. Thus, clones will be treated as disposable property, with fewer rights than any slave, bred and killed for the benefit of others. Most of us would against an abortion. Then we should agree with against human cloning too because when they kill the cloned embryo when they are done with it, it's the same as killing the baby as if one was getting an abortion. It simply means that you create it and you killed it yourself. It is wrong and