Should Human Cloning Be Allowed?

Should Human Cloning Be Allowed?One of todays most disputable question is, Should Human Cloning be Allow? Unfortunately, our society ceaselessly seems to watch overs more in forgivinge and unpleasant ways to eradicate itself it also seeks ways to escape that eradication finished immortality. The issue at trade is should human re- acquire be allowed in a society that seeks immortality in the agnomen of science. I remember copy is an evolutionary dead close and the use of re-create techniques to make ideal human would last devalue action. Therefore, when plenty fear death, as most Christians do, the prospect of achieving immortality through the cloning process becomes provocative if not desirable (Sanders, 1974, p. 22). Although science might compels us to seek a higher quality of human feel, in that respect are certain activities in the area of genetic science and cloning that violate basic h anest and good principles. eyepatch, social effects fetch increased the hunchledge of human genetics and quite maybe have been speculated almost and studied more than those of any ongoing social change in taradiddle (Greely, 1998, p. 474). While most of society understands the curiosity around knowing how humans work, along with the need to know about DNA, to eliminate many familial illnesses and disabilities. There are still those ranging from the United States President to the trade union movement have trumpeted the immorality of cloning, and research funding within the areas of animal and/or human cloning has been minify or blocked in numerous countries and states (Rollin, 1999, p. 52). As most people condemn the idea of this in animals, it is more so appalling for humans. At what point would the experiments stop if we allow them to elapse, and who bequeath set the boundaries. commonwealth have different characteristics, which set them apart from each other, these traits range from illnesses and disabilities, which are all part of life regar dless of how we feel. I am sorry but scientists could better serve society as advisers, than as decision makers and leave it up to society to determine what is objurgate and wrong. The fact that cloning humans is about creating a genetically indistinguishable copy of a previously existing or existing psyche is in my imprint wrong on all accounts.Anti-thesisI might add that while there are those for cloning and have established many positive arguments concerning the copying of human DNA, much(prenominal) as developing new medicines for cures. They also believe that one day this research could put an eradicate to approximately hereditary diseases and dis devotes, as well as allowing infertile parents to produce children with their protest DNA. Finally and most significantly a few scientists have suggested extending the ageing process all together through the cloning process. heretofore though there are many encouraging factors about cloning human embryos, there is always anoth er side that raises many issues against the process. In a Time/CNN opinion poll of only vitamin D adult Americans, fewer than 1 in 5 Americans think human cloning should be allowed to continue. cardinal percent of the participants in the poll believed it is morally wrong to clone humans and sixty-three percent tell apart it is against perfections pass on (Battaglia, 1995, p. 675). Many religions organizations disagree with the tampering of human life because it goes against their beliefs and argue that it is immoral. For instance, if perfected many people may turn to this method of conceiving unnaturally, in order to create the perfect son or daughter, which about may consider an unnatural birth. Many have argued that an embryo is indeed a human life, and if dishonored during the cloning process, there is the possibility killing it. Therefore, making the practice of embryo cloning, an immoral surgical process. Twenty old age ago gene function was unknown today we have the g enetic dictionary that deciphers the code of life. still more recent has been the application of this knowledge to our own species (Nagle, 1972, p. 372). While cloning is still considered to be in the early stages of research, and all the pros and cons contradicting each other, the briny question is, should we allow human cloning in the name of science and take a chance at destroying the genetic cycle of humanity?The two main types of cloning that have caused good controversies around the world are embryo and reproductive cloning. Embryo cloning being the process that duplicates the procedure found in nature to produce twins, while reproductive cloning is a method where they extract the DNA from an ovum and replace it with the DNA extracted from a cell of an adult, therefrom producing a copy of an existing person. Based on research done on animals, the results normally end with the subjects being born with severe inherent defects making it a profoundly unethical and immoral proce dure for humans.At any stage of human cloning, there is no agreement concerning the ethical issues that arise by the process of destroying human embryos. Given that this procedure is somewhat comparable to traditional conception and because both(prenominal) methods create a pre-embryo, the question that still arises, is the pre-embryo is a human being?Many people have the opinion that an embryo in its early stage does not require any particular moral consideration, still throughout Hebrew and Christian history, it is taught that what it means to be human as a person and as a people can be fully known only in reference to God (Cole-Turner, 1992, p. 162). However, there are still those that believe the embryonic cells at this stage are not similar to human beings because it lacks self-awareness of its environment. This simply implies that the embryo attains human form much later in victimisation, maybe at the point when the brain develops and the embryo becomes aware of itself. Ev en though genetic research and cloning offers an luck to cure disease and allows infertile couples the possibility of having children, there is another side to this whole argument. For instance, imagine if cloning was used for the general improvement of the population, meaning collecting donor eggs and sperms from selected females and males to increase the probability of a genetically superior species. If this is unacceptable for us, what do we do if some other nation, such as our enemy, begins such a eugenic program (Nagle, 1972, p. 376)?Many people remember the physician who substituted his sperm for the husbands to created children that were the doctors and not that of the husband. In an unscientific and unethical manner, he was using the couples to bear his children and to pay their rearing expenses. As a result, he was using science to manipulate couples to his own distorted sense of importance. Media coverage continues to suggest that the only ethical dispute is over the issue of destroying embryos, when in reality there is an unethical risk to a womens health, passing the only one conclusion, it is unethical for both the mother and child. Therefore, when it comes to cloning humans, I believe we are acting on dangerous grounds, which are unethical and immoral to the human race as a whole. be quiet society continues to face the question, should we allow human cloning in the name of science. Unfortunately, many people find this to be a tough question to answer believing there really is no right answers. Throughout all of the research already done, all we find is a lot of manifold opinions and emotions to consider. While, everybody has their own opinions about cloning, and I can see where it is difficult to determine right and wrong from the issues they have raised, both positive and negative.SynthesisThe idea behind human cloning to discover new medicines and possible cures for hereditary diseases and illnesses, or at least create a decrease in the numb er, is the main cause of mixed emotions. For instance, I believe that everybody has his or her time, and the idea of human cloning to obtain a longer life is absurd.Looking at all of the negatives issues, I see a strong argument on the spectral and moral sides. However, I suppose this would not affect everybody, being our society is on the decline when it comes to ethical motive. While cloning for infertile parents may seem like a decent matter to do, it still poses a question concerning children that are in need of a good home. To me adoption would be a good moral decision on the part of the adopting parents.Although, cloning human embryos is still in the early stages of development it still has a long way to go before discovering the whole concept. There is one thing for sure cloning human embryos will continue, only stopping when the government takes over and demands they put an end to the whole procedure. Despite the strong arguments and looking into the future, the commotion generated by the success of mammal cloning technology, applicable to man, highlights the fact that experimental science can raise, at least for certain people, a genuine ethical problem (Lavelle, 2005, p. 218). This leaves society with the conclusion that cloning will become more and more common as our knowledge of science and embryo development increases. However, the question of whether to allow this type of human experiment will remain unanswered. I believe the part of society that has the strongest morals when it comes to human life will continue to argue that it is still immoral.. After all the fact remains that, certain activities in the area of genetics and cloning violate basic environmental and ethical principles. Therefore, immortality is something we have lived without and come to except through our morals and religious beliefs not some scientific experiment.Although, I personally feel that embryo cloning should have never started in the first place, as pitiless as it may sound, the benefits of having this happen in order to stop further generations from suffering is definitely something many may consider. To think that this experimental behavior will create the perfect human is sad, because we will still have an imperfect world based on our immoral decisions. Even though there is a need for developing healthier cells for cancer treatment, achieving these results through cloning could potentially cause harm to an unborn child. As heartless as it may sound, I would prefer a child that had only mild disabilities, than one severely disabled because of the cloning process, or even worse, knowing that if it died from a cloning malfunction.I also think that ethics and morals extend a major role in determining when an embryo becomes a living being. My own emplacement is that even though the embryo is in this early stage and attached to its mother, it is alive. Therefore, we need to respect the embryo for what it is, a human being at its early stages of d evelopment and take in to account that one day this living creature will someday say mom or dad, so in consideration of this, would it not be sad to use it for experimental purposes. Therefore, in conclusion the question of whether or not human cloning should continue will remain unanswered. The one thing for sure is that the scientific part of humanity will continue to find more appalling and destructive ways of annihilating itself and the moral part of humanity will find a way to escape that obliteration by seeking to improve the quality life through natural sources.