To Clone Or Not To Clone To Clone or Not to Clone “On a soft summer night July 5th, 1966, at 5 p.m., the most famous lamb in history entered the world. (Kolata, pg 1) “Many people wonder if this is a miracle for which we can thank God, or an ominous new way to play God ourselves.” (Duff, pg1) Now the question is do we clone humans next? For what reasons would we clone humans? Would this be an ethical thing to do in the right situation? These are the issues I wish to discuss in this essay. From the time I was a child I have been hearing about cloning, and until recently, it was only as a science fiction theory. Cloning is now a reality. It undeniably has some very scary prospects. It is very questionable as to just how some in the scientific world will now attempt to proceed with this process, now that it is a reality instead of a theory. Over the years society has picked up coined words from the scientific, but cloning has to be one of the all time favorites.
A fairly simple word, clone evokes more controversy than any other word from science. Cloning is not much different from in-vitro fertilization. The major difference is that only one parent donor is required. It is basically creating an identical twin in which one is younger than the original. The word clone refers to one or more offspring derived from one ancestor. You would think with such a simple definition it would not be such a controversial subject, yet it is. The possibility of this technique being applied to the human race shakes me to the very core.
Could we be heading to the Hitler ideal of a more superior race? Will we use it to insure all babies will be born without birth defects? Will it be a way for some more fortunate to store extra body parts for later use? Will it replace adoption? Could that part of society considered unacceptable be eliminated? These are only a few of the numerous possibilities of its uses. Could cloning in its self produce a perfect world? One truly outrageous idea many people have, is that people from our past such as Hitler, could be cloned. Nothing is further from the truth. At the present time cloning is only done using living cells, so no person already deceased, could be cloned. Even if it were possible, it would not be the Hitler from history. This is a totally different world than he lived in.
The factors that determined his personality are no longer in place. Many plants purchased these days purchased these days are clones. So the theory is as old as man. It is merely taking a living piece of one thing and producing another, and it seems this is completely acceptable. It is only when science crossed over to animal life that the problems began.
People realized if it could be accomplished with a sheep it is completely conceivable that it can also be done with a human. Not only a moral issue it is also a religious issue. Many are afraid we will end up with these armies of drones, not real people. Any human, if cloned, would be like you and me, totally unique, with a soul, merely a younger identical twin raised initially in a petri dish. : Some religious organizations have made formal responses to the cloning issue.
Here are some of them. The Catholic Church: Pope John Paul II released a statement condemning the cloning of all life forms. The Vatican also issued a statement that only condemned human cloning, but did not address other forms. Judaism: The Chief Rabbi of Israel, Meir Law, stated that the cloning of any creature is against Jewish law. However, some believe cloning in order to produce better food and medication would be allowable in Jewish tradition.
World Council of Churches: Martin Robra, executive secretary- the council would prefer a moratorium until all ethical questions can be resolved. There is one problem with the cloning of Dolly that no one has the answer to: Was she six years old when she was born? The cell that was used to create her was from a six-year-old ewe. Cells apparently have an age mechanism that cannot be reset. If this is true, her life expectancy will be short. Will it have any effect on development? Assuming all of this, a baby that was cloned would be the age of its donating parent, a true medical problem.
At the present time, the cloning of humans has been banned in the United States and various other countries. The possibility of mutations is one of the reasons for this action. In early experiments on frogs, mutations occurred. Are we willing to risk one mutation in human testing? What if there was a problem would terminate that life? At what point is it a life? This is a debate that has gone on for years in the abortion conflict. There are many good things that could be accomplished with the use of cloning.
A greater understanding of miscarriages and their causes is only one. Along with this would go treatment for spontaneous abortions? The creation of animal organs compatible with humans could be possibly accomplished. Spinal cord injuries might be able to be treated, by regenerating stem cells, to repair damage to tissue. There are already a lot of controversial issues going on due to cloning. There are those wanting sperm and eggs extracted from comatose partners for later use. This is a highly legal issue, since no one can seem to agree to the ownership of these two things.
There have even been those requesting that their dead pets be cloned, since they are irreplaceable. Some parents of terminally ill children have requested that their children be cloned. To me, cloning a terminally ill child would be a strange thing indeed. Although the cloned child would be an identical twin to the il …