Imagine a little boy with a severe disease who has an extremely rare blood type and needs an organ donor within a month to be able to live. There are not any donors anywhere in the world whose organs would be suitable, and even if there was, the waiting list is so long it could take years to find one, and by that time, the boy would have passed on. Yet right around the corner, scientists have developed technology that would enable them to grow the organs he needs with samples of his DNA. This would be great, but because there are people who do not agree with the idea, it is illegal, so the boy dies. Welcome to the great debate on cloning. .
Since the birth of Dolly, the cloned sheep, many questions have arisen on how cloning works, how cloning humans could affect society and whether or not it is ethical. Although there is little disagreement about the profound effects the cloning of human beings would have on, the question remains of whether these effects will be positive or negative.
Cloning, or somatic cell nuclear transfer, is the production of individuals who are genetically identical to an already existing individual. In essence, it is creating somebody's identical twin; they"re just not born at the same time. The process involves taking a mature but unfertilized egg, removing its nucleus, putting a nucleus from the person to be cloned into the egg, and once the egg begins to divide, transferring it to a woman's uterus to initiate pregnancy (Kass). Many people think that because a clone will look the same as its genetic counterpart, it would act the same, but just like a set of twins, each has its own personality and develops its own individuality based on its surroundings. This is one of the reasons some people support cloning humans. They feel that since parents control all aspects of their children's lives and identities, why not control what genes their children have as well.
There has been much debate on this topic, and the debate is certain to rage on for many years to come. ... Is cloning legal? ... The positive aspects that cloning has to offer are entirely to great to ignore. ... Never again would we be forced to stand by idly, watching as a great animal becomes little more than a fossil. ... To clone or not to clone is not the question. ...
So, today, let's talk about Human Cloning Acceptable Or Not by the way of debating. ... The rules of this debate are very simple. ... On March 4, 1997, EX-President of united states Bill Clinton proposed a five-year moratorium on federal and privately funded human cloning research, in response to the large-scale human cloning ethics debate. ... And it is the time for free debate. ... On the other hand, it does make great contribution on medical science and other human health aspects. ...
There are beneficial and negative aspects of each side of this heated debate. ... One thing I don't believe is very beneficial to the cloning debate is several high power politicians sitting around, making laws about things that they don't even have proper knowledge of. ... There are many benefits to cloning. ... This is one the most controversial topics in the cloning debate. ... Also being able to cure cancer, AIDs, and heart attacks would be a great help to many people. ...
Human cloning is so much more complex we must take the steps to prevent human cloning. There are many problems with cloning, getting out of hand, as well and religious and ethical debates too. ... At first you might say yes, a great idea. ... Say you were the clone. ... Can you clone it too? ...
Scientists, bio-ethicists, doctors, lawyers, professors, and authors join in the debate over human cloning and its medical benefits versus moral and ethnical concern. ... They "recommended a three-to-five-year moratorium on human cloning research to give the public time to debate and examine the issues involved" (Biomedical: Roleff, ed.16). ... Some interesting arguments revolving around the debate for and against human cloning are the use of cloning for asexual reproduction, basic human rights, and its use for gene therapy. ... On the contrast and opposing views toward cloning, there is a...
It will go through much debate, but ten years from now it will be accepted scientifically, socially, and morally. ... I feel that now would be a great time to invest in biotechnical companies specializing in agricultural and medicinal cloning. This article says nothing about the great potentials of long term investment. ... Ten to fifteen years from now this agricultural cloning will be a commonly routine thing and price wars will begin for the products produced by them which means many great investment opportunities will be available. ... This is great I do not know how anyone can ...
The first successful clone was accomplished about two years ago, although not a human clone. ... This controversial issue has been studied and examined by many great people, including two men by the names of Laurence Tribe and Charles Krauthammer, whose essays will be examined in this paper. ... He then proposed a five-year ban on cloning. ... Congress should ban human cloning now. ... Tribe later goes on to say, "The initial debate has cooled, however, and many in the scientific field now seem to be wondering what all the fuss was about-(Tribe 460). ...
On February 22, 1996, Ian Wilmut brought cloning of animals to our attention, when the first animal was successfully cloned, on that history-making day the cloned sheep named Dolly was born. ... Despite the great technological discovery, cloning is causing great controversy because the more we learn about cloning, the closer we are getting to duplicate humans. ... Human cloning is a highly debated issue right now, mainly because it is a very new possibility for the future. ... It logical that if I was cloned wouldn't my clone be just like me .its my clone it is me. ... But is the clon...
Each of these articles will be of great use to me regarding the points I want to make in my paper. ... Similarities and Differences between Daniel Wolfe's report, Ray Bohlin's article, Robert Wachbroit's essay, and Alan Boyles's report: In a newspaper published by the Journalism department of Boston University, reporter Daniel Wolfe (2002) reports on a debate on cloning in an article called "Anti-Cloning Team wins by a Nose."" The debate appears to have been focused on the reproductive use of cloning, which could allow an otherwise infertile couple to have a child, who...
