The Ethics of Human Cloning
In the beginning, God created Earth, thus creating man and woman... Or at least that is what some believe. However, over thousands of years, history, culture, and technology has slowly laid out the foundation of life; the human age and civilization went through a metamorphosis. Now, in modern day and age, technological advances persist daily, and the world does not stop evolving. We, as people, continue to learn more about ourselves, about our planet, about the stars, and – basically – about life itself. Biologically speaking, the human body is such a marvelous, complex unit, and, to this day, our leading scientists are still trying to discover what keeps us “ticking.” Some people say that the human race evolved from other ancient life sources; some people say that some cosmic phenomena took place; some people say that some heavenly being is responsible for our existence. Whichever the case may be, that information will forever be held in the book of life, deep within its emeritus pages. The question at hand is this: Is human cloning unethical? Should man be allowed to, in a sense, play God, and create humanistic beings? Is it just? Is it an advancement in medical history? Well, due to this topic indirectly taking a touch upon religion (which is a controversial topic within itself), there are a plethora of opposing views.
Cloning is nothing new to medical sciences. Cloning is an archaic story, primeval in history. The word “clone” is derived from the Greek word klon, which means asexual reproduction. In 1996, William Blake, a member of the scientific team at the Roslin Institute, created a poem (“Mary Had A Little Lamb”) about one of their experiments. In “Mary Had A Little Lamb,” Blake depicts the cloning of a sheep, and takes an askant approach to the cloning humans. In the poem, Blake references Dolly, the sheep that his institution cloned, and he uses Mary as a symbolic approach to the cloning of human beings. Anyway, the...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document