Human Cloning

Imagine it is the year 2008. As you pick up your
daily issue of the New York Times, you begin to
read some of the interesting articles on the front
page. The top story of the paper reads, "Germany
Wins All Gold Medals at the Olympic Games: Is
Cloning in Competitive Events Fair?" Other
interesting articles reported on the front page
include: "Rock Star Stacy Levesque and Lover's
Nuclear Transplanted Child is Born" and "Former
President George Bush's Cloned Heart Transplant
A Success." These articles are examples of how
much of an influence cloning can be in the future.
Although these articles would have seemed
science fiction several years ago, the idea of
cloning became a reality in 1997. On February 27,
1997, it was reported that scientist produced the
first clone of an adult sheep, attracting international
attention and raising questions of whether cloning
should take place. Within days, the public called
for ethics inquires and new laws to ban cloning.
The potential effects of cloning are unimaginable.
What would life be like with women who are able
to give birth to themselves, cloned humans who
are used for "spare parts", and genetically superior
cloned humans? Based on the positive advances
of cloning versus the negative effects, one must
ask his/herself whether cloning humans should be
banned entirely.

According to the American Heritage College
Dictionary, cloning is "to reproduce or propagate
asexually." This definition means that cloning
enables the creation of offspring without any
sexual action or sexual contact. There are several
methods for cloning: separating the embryo and
making twins with the same genetic make-up,
taking a cell from a fertilized ovum when the cell
begins to split and replace it in another female's
ovum, or nuclear transplantation. In the 10 March
1998 issue of Time, J. Madeleine Nash explains
one example of how a clone of an adult ewe is
"born" from nuclear transplantation. First, a cell is... [continues]

Read full essay