top-rated free essay

Cloning Is Ethically and Morally Wrong

Oct 08, 1999 1015 Words
The question shakes us all to our very souls. For humans to consider the cloning of one another forces them all to question the very concepts of right and wrong that make them all human. The cloning of any species, whether they be human or non-human, is ethically and morally wrong. Scientists and ethicists alike have debated the implications of human and non-human cloning extensively since 1997 when scientists at the Roslin Institute in Scotland produced Dolly. No direct conclusions have been drawn, but compelling arguments state that cloning of both human and non-human species results in harmful physical and psychological effects on both groups. The following issues dealing with cloning and its ethical and moral implications will be addressed: cloning of human beings would result in severe psychological effects in the cloned child, and that the cloning of non-human species subjects them to unethical or moral treatment for human needs. <br>

<br>The possible physical damage that could be done if human cloning became a reality is obvious when one looks at the sheer loss of life that occurred before the birth of Dolly. Less than ten percent of the initial transfers survive to be healthy creatures. There were 277 trial implants of nuclei. Nineteen of those 277 were deemed healthy while the others were discarded. Five of those nineteen survived, but four of them died within ten days of birth of sever abnormalities. Dolly was the only one to survive (Fact: Adler 1996). If those nuclei were human, "the cellular body count would look like sheer carnage" (Logic: Kluger 1997). Even Ian Wilmut, one of the scientists accredited with the cloning phenomenon at the Roslin Institute agrees, "the more you interfere with reproduction, the more danger there is of things going wrong" (Expert Opinion). The psychological effects of cloning are less obvious, but none the less, very plausible. In addition to physical harms, there! are worries about the psychological harms on cloned human children. One of those harms is the loss of identity, or sense of uniqueness and individuality. Many argue that cloning crates serious issues of identity and individuality and forces humans to consider the definition of self. Gilbert Meilaender commented on the importance of genetic uniqueness not only to the child but to the parent as well when he appeared before the National Bioethics Advisory Commission on March 13, 1997. He states that "children begin with a kind of genetic independence of [the parent]. They replicate neither their father nor their mother. That is a reminder of the independence that [the parent] must eventually grant them...To lose even in principle this sense of the child as a gift will not be good for the children" (Expert Opinion). Others look souly at the child, like philosopher Hans Jonas. He suggests that humans have an inherent "right to ignorance" or a quality of "separateness." Hum! an cloning, in which there is a time gap between the beginning of the lives of the earlier and later twin, is fundamentally different from homozygous twins that are born at the same time and have a simultaneous beginning of their lives. Ignorance of the effect of one's genes on one's future is necessary for the spontaneous construction of life and self (Jonas 1974). Human cloning is obviously damaging to both the family of and the cloned child. It is harder to convince that non-human cloning is wrong and unethical, but it is just the same. The cloning of a non-human species subjects them to unethical treatment purely for human needs (Expert Opinion: Price 97). Western culture and tradition has long held the belief that the treatment of animals should be guided by different ethical standards than the treatment of humans. Animals have been seen as non feeling and savage beasts since time began. Humans in general have no problem with seeing animals as objects to be used whenever it becomes necessary. But what would happen if humans started to use animals as body for growing human organs? Where is the line drawn between human and non human? If a primate was cloned so that it grew human lungs, liver, kidneys, and heart., what would it then be? What if we were to learn how to clone functioning brains and have them grow inside of chimps? Would non-human primates, such as a chimpanzee, who carried one or more human genes via transgenic technology, be defined as still a chimp, a human, a subhuman, or something else? If defined as human, would we have to give it rights of citizenship? And if humans were to carry non-human transgenic genes, would that alter our definitions and treatment of them(Deductive Logic: Kluger 1997)? Also, if the technology were to be so that scientists could transfer human genes into animals and vice-versa, that would heighten the danger of developing zoonoses, diseases that are transmitted from animals to humans. It could create a world wide catastrophe that no one would be able to stop (Potential Risks). In conclusion, the ethical and moral implications of cloning are such that it would be wrong for the human race to support or advocate it. The sheer loss of life in both humans and non-humans is enough to prove that cloning would be a foolish endeavor, whatever the cause. <br>

<br><b>Works Cited</b>
<br><li>Kluger, Jeffery. "Will we Follow the Sheep?" Time Magazine. March 10, 1997 Vol. 149 No.10 <br><li> "The Cloning Controversy." [Online] Available <a href="http://www.sican.com/explorations">http://www.sican.com/explorations</a>. September 23, 1998. <br><li> "Ethics on Cloning: The issue at hand." [Online] Available <a href="http://www.time.com/cloning">http://www.time.com/cloning</a>. September 24, 1998. <br><li>National Bioethics Advisory Commission. "Cloning Human Beings." [Online] Available <a href="http://bioethics.gov/pubs.html">http://bioethics.gov/pubs.html</a>. September 24, 1998. Price, Joyce. <br><li> "Before There was Dolly, There Were Disasters: Scientists failed to disclose abnormalities." The Washington Times. March 11, 1997.

Cite This Document

Related Documents

  • Euthanasia: Morally Right or Ethically Wrong

    ... Euthanasia: Morally Right or Ethically Wrong SOC 120: Introduction to Ethics & Social Responsibility October 02, 2011 Euthanasia: Morally Right or Ethically Wrong Euthanasia is a “mercy killing” or “merciful death”; a method that implements the practice of ending one’s life to free an individual from pain and sufferin...

    Read More
  • clonıng

    ...NAME- LASTNAME: EMİNE MERİÇ SECTION NUMBER:157-12 CLONİNG Probably, one of the most important advancement technique is cloning in a field of medicine in new century .Firs of all, scientists and genetic bioengineering intend by helping save some animal species from extinction. Animals which are endangered destroy due to not va...

    Read More
  • Morally and Ethically

    ... Morally: Since rationalism is based on using our mind to make reasonable judgment, I think what has happened about the leaking of information about the NSA program of recording information is morally acceptable. As John Locke’s philosophy about “natural law”, which included moral equity and nature freedom, citizens have the rights to no...

    Read More
  • Is All Murder Morally Wrong?

    ...Is All Murder Morally Wrong? By Lianna Nicole Santiago PHI 2010 Murder is a touchy subject that can be very controversial depending on who the victim or victims are, and also who the predator is. Things like the relationship between a victim and predator, and the essential “reasons” behind the murder play a big part on whether or no...

    Read More
  • Cloning

    ...Nichole Hart 2/11/13 Med Law and Ethics Human cloning is the creation of a genetically identical copy of a human, a very controversial issue, the following tells about some controversies that go along with it. After graduation, the students of a private academy were told that they were clones made specifically to donate their body parts to ...

    Read More
  • Is Abortion Morally Right or Wrong

    ...Is Abortion Morally Right or Wrong Kirstyn Fletcher PHI 103 Informal Logic Anthony Biduck October 26, 2011 What About it is Considered Moral or Unmoral? This subject is probably one of the top five most controversial subjects in the world today. Is it immoral to kill an unborn child? Do we have the right to choose what grows in our bodie...

    Read More
  • Why abortion is morally wrong

    ... No matter how you slice it, abortion is morally wrong. Although that should not be misinterpreted for a pro-life stance on abortion because there are numerous circumstances that must be considered in each situation. Just because abortion is morally impermissible, it does not mean that society will deem you a bad person for getting an abortion ...

    Read More
  • Prisons Are Inhumane and Morally Wrong

    ...Prisons are Inhumane and Morally Wrong Corruption in the Prison System Raise the Crime Rate, an article written by Christopher Glazek (2012) argues that the United States seems safer due to a shift in crime from urban centers to prisons. Which has become a very shameful part of the United States history. Prisoners are kept in over populat...

    Read More

Discover the Best Free Essays on StudyMode

Conquer writer's block once and for all.

High Quality Essays

Our library contains thousands of carefully selected free research papers and essays.

Popular Topics

No matter the topic you're researching, chances are we have it covered.