This essay has been submitted by a student. This is not an example of the work written by our professional essay writers.
Cloning is nothing but making the exact genetically copy of an existing organism. The biomedical building blocks which would govern the function and the structure of all the living creatures are able to be cloned as whole cells. Here both gene and cloning would be the same research tool for all the biomedical research to be conducted. Cloning can be done on insects, plants, animals and humans. When talking about cloning humans again we can say there are two types of it as well. One is known as Therapeutic Cloning or Stem-cell cloning, here only a part of the body or an organ in cloned to heal incurable diseases and is announced to be legal in many parts of the world. But the other is known as Reproductive Cloning or Human Cloning, here a complete individual is being cloned and is announced illegal everywhere in the world due to various ethical, social and legal issues being raised.
Research on cloning began in 1980s where scientist started doing research on higher order animals, mammals being clearer. The increasing success of the research has led the scientist with the confidence to find the possible ways of human cloning. This discussion has opened up a widespread disagreement both within scientific community and the public community, over weather research on human cloning should be permitted or not. The first experiment on cloning a human was conducted in 1993 by researchers in George Washington University in Washington D.C. (this experiment was conducted on a genetically abnormal embryo (fertilized-egg), who had no chance of survival.)
Research were done at constant to get the correct outcome, hence by 1997 researchers in Scotland shocked by the announcement of successful in transplanting clone of adult sheep. This sheep was named as 'Dolly', and had three parents: the nucleus of a mammary gland cell from one sheep was blended with an enucleated egg cell from a second sheep and the produced embryo was placed in the uterus of the third sheep. In simple terms if we summarize the procedure used by Wilmot for the production of Dolly was, from an adult sheep the nucleus was removed and was placed in the egg which consisted a nucleus (Sternberg 2). Dolly got famous almost like a celebrity sorts, and later she was also able to become a mother (through normal reproductive methods), showing that she was a fully functioning normal adult.
The researchers who created Dolly showed their next intention on cloning humans; they said that the purpose of their research was the most accurate method of producing genetically identical animals. But this announcement again brought a huge disagreement and disapproval from people. A Time/CNN poll found that 93 percent of Americans were against human cloning. The Roman Catholics also called for a universal ban on human cloning, in the meanwhile President Bill Clinton ordered for no funds on cloning research.
As for responding to the public concern the House of Representatives and the US Senate immediately blueprinted a bill to completely ban human cloning. The National Bioethics Advisory Commission (NABC), an expert panel which was created by Clinton for the exploration on the ethical issues on the biotechnological industry, they were given the task of inquiring the issue. After the collection of all the declaration from the scientist, ethicist, religious leaders and other NBAC recommended in June 1997, that therapeutic cloning should be permitted but where as human cloning was morally unaccepted.
Apart from all these disapprovals from the ethicist, religious leaders and various other people who stand against human cloning, I would like to present this paper to show that human cloning should be made legal for the betterment of the human race. Cloning is just another crowning gesture towards the scientific researcher and the mankind, which if banned now, then would be lost forever. From the time I started doing research on this I have come across various disapproval on human cloning, but if you actually think really deep into the issue none of them are reasonable or carry any meaning at all. The most commonly raised argument against human cloning is that people will not have their own individuality and dignity. This is not true clone would still have their own personalities; it is also being assumed by many scientist that clone would be identical to their donor only by 50%. If clones are being said to have no individuality and personality, then why isn't anyone saying the same with identical twins.
Genes of a Human can only govern the shape and number of neurons in the brain, but it is the way neurons are arranged in the brain which decides individuals' personality, behavior and their thoughts. The consequences experienced influences the connection of the brain which pop-out the personality of the person, hence personality and identity is something very unique to an individual. It is the same in the case of clones as well. It can also be said that identical twins have much more similarity than clone twins (Wary 2, Robertson 7). Clones will be biologically different. The DNA which would be inserted to the other persons' host egg will take the maternal factors from proteins and mitochondria in the egg which has the capability to alter the embryo's development (Bailey 2). Physiological difference would also take place because of the difference between a normal mother and a clone's surrogate mother's womb. Cloning is no danger to humans' uniqueness and identity, and it wouldn't a threat to the society.
Banning cloning for whatsoever the reason, it would be something really foolish. Cloning represents the medical usage and importance leaving apart the ethical and moral aspects, which would affect the least to today's modern society. Banning cloning is nothing but just threatening the people who can use the science and do so many valuable benefits to the people in the society and ways to improve lives more.
Imagine having a world full of "Mini-Hitler's" made by replicating the genetic materials of Adolf Hitler, who was fetching for domination. We can visualize those killing million and millions of people for final solution of raising their superiority and creating the second world Holocaust. This scenario people think when they ever hear the word 'cloning'.
Cloning was always considered to be a science fiction. There have been millions of people who have enjoyed the story of cloning, in various ways, it could be as in film, fictional story book or any other way of entertainment, but this is always not so true. Those modes of entertainment has always shown about a sinister using cloning technology to win conquer the world, maybe because it was always unexpected for cloning would ever become actuality. The commencement of Dolly made everyone astonished even the federal government.
Many states have also endorsed restrictions on human cloning; some of the countries have even banned reproductive cloning. Those countries governments reaction are illogical and should be removed as soon as possible. The government should influence human cloning not ban it. This is to be done because there are certain benefits of human cloning. The ethical involvement on this is no eternal; besides the fact the enthusiastic scientist will continue the research with or without government concern.
Most of the people also say that cloning a human could be extremely dangerous because during the period of cloning Dolly some amount of baby sheep had to lose their lives. But still it is the ground for the research, no research can be done at one chance perfectly, it takes some trying, in which we should accept the negatives and positives both equally. Thinking on the death perspectives then why aren't people appealing to ban some of the worse case scenarios. As in taking for example, car accidents are one of the greatest issues in the world. Every year the accident death rates are increasing and still no one is asking to ban cars on roads, or even its production. It is just because with some risk, still it provides a high benefits to the people. Those benefits just overcome the danger; this will be the same with human cloning as well.
There are various benefits that can come about with the usage of cloning technology. One of these is the treatment for infertility. There can be various cause for infertility, they could be by the genetic defects, injuries to the reproductive organs, congenital defect or even exposure to toxic substance and radiations. Due to the problems there has been many assisted-reproductive technologies been developed. This would certainly include the involvement of surrogate mothers for the females who are unable to give birth to child cause of non-functional uterus, intrcytoplasmic sperm injection for males who can't produce viable sperm, and as newly found In-Vitro Fertilization (IVF) technology for women who don't have fallopian tube or if the tubes have been blocked. But these treatments have shown they are ineffective and inefficient, they are still unable to provide support for people with lack of reproductive abilities else have been removed. Within America only there are 12M Americans who are infertile at have children. They would engage years and years on painful and expensive treatment with having the least chance of success. Most people suffer through infertility because of the inability to produce viable gametes (reproductive cells), but whereas cloning will not require viable gametes, any sperm, egg or even any body cell will do, in this technology defective gametes will be bypassed and would allow people with no reproductive ability still to bear their own child naturally.
Still many of the people have the will and wish to produce their own child. It is true that there are various children in orphanage who want parents, but still if parents happen to adopt any, then the issue for the surrounding would be the child's adaptation, and maybe someday the child might get the wanting to find their actual parent who gave them birth only. It is the kind of society we live in where maybe cloning could be a solution. Cloning would also avoid depression, divorce cases, and suicide cases among sterile people; these are among those to which infertility lead to. Somehow cloning is much more effective. The greatest argument which can be raised against cloning is that it will not make any difference on the world's genetic diversity; it could be because the economical and the aroused factors would surely make some of the parents to opt for cloning. Each and every parent moving for the option of cloning can surely be said to be a drop gathering in the ocean of genetic diversity.
Involvement of ethical aspects with cloning can be considered to be unstable, because as it was shown with IVF. During 1960s and 1970s, IVF was argued to be unsafe and to produce deformed children, it was also believed that it would destroy many American families or change, and also that it was against God's will. Those are the same arguments used against cloning as well. Many countries have stood against and asked to ban it in 1970s. But the same idea was changed by the people when they saw the birth of Louie Brown, who was the first child born with the usage of IVF. People then rectified that he was just a normal child. Then the fear towards IVF was vanished. Since few years now it has become a practice, and this would be the same in the case of cloning as well.
Various arguments on these ethical issues have started with some idea. The "Mini-Hitler" scenario which I have mentioned above is imaginative, but actually that is the kind of thing people think when they hear the world 'cloning'. People think that cloning is just photocopying an adult human being. This is not true at all. In cloning technology only a cloned embryo is formed. The embryo must develop in the uterus, and the child developed from it must experience childhood and immaturity both. People have an idea that cloned would actually be the same in looks and in the behavior vise as well to the donor. This is not true as well. The clone might probably similar by looks but not the way they behave. Genes add to the layout of abilities and limits of a human being, but the behavior and the mentality of an individual is govern by the environmental and the society factors. If talking about identical twin, even they are naturally cloned people and also have the same physical features, but still by behaviorally and mental characteristics are different. If anyone tries to clone Adolf Hitler might produce a highly talented painter.
The only fear ethicist have is that will the subordinate class of human be created only for the purpose of tissues and organ donor. They also fear that clones will not get the same right of normal humans. These fears are just useless, and they are being the victims of those thoughts. Cloned humans cannot be more "harvested" for their organs compared to the people today.
The other ethical double mind is how good will the cloned child is psychologically. People wonder what type of relationship will the cloned child share with his/her parents who are physically similar to them. They are really eager to know how the child will be able to undertake the pressure of being compared to the identical donor. Single aspect which need to be kept in mind by each and every individual is that the factors which would ever affect a child's life is the love, commitment and dedication that the child get from their parents, it surely isn't the methods or circumstance of the child's birth. What will the first generation of clone children feel can be a question to be asked. Children and their parents will have to ignore the problem which may rise just because they are identical. Even being the sight of attraction of all the people around specially the scientist will not be an easy task for the children and for the parents either. But on the other side they still can have some kind of new satisfaction. The cloned child and the parents still can have the ability to share the same joy and happiness which naturally born twins share.
Many religious leaders argue cloning to be unnatural, because it is different from the normal sexual reproduction. It may not be the normal sexual reproduction, and maybe can be named to be asexual reproduction still it is necessarily not immoral. People always had a very natural distaste for anything not-so-natural. But all the man build objects are not so bad. If man-made objects are tagged as bad then, it is certainly bad to wear clothes or fly in the sky, these are just things made to improve the life quality lived by the people. Cloning is nothing different to it; it is an aid to the creation of life. It would just prevent couples from having child.
The religious objection is not completely based on the unnatural way of producing the child. But they also claim that it is against God's will, and it is over going God's control over human life and its creation. These claims can be said to be very uncertain and holds no point or objective. This discriminative thinking is upcomming because of people's connection towards morality and religion. When doubts are raised about the morality perspective through new scientific development, they change it to the sacred writing or to religious leaders. Morality is not something which requires God's word, but it is something people must determine before believing God is right. Religious belief and acts were developed in the older ages because of the circumstance they had been facing then, but in today's' world some are valid and still followed whereas some are not being followed any further. The authors of the religious text books like Quran and Bible did not have any knowledge about cloning or IVF, hence it is not possible for those books to solve the issue to continuing or discontinuing research on cloning. Hence cloning cannot be said to be wrong in religious belief.
The most common religious objection is that cloning is against God's will and authority over human creation and life (Goodfield 94). To prove themselves Muslims utilize a statement from Quran, "He alone grants life and deals death, and unto Him you all must return,". This is what concern them and they say it is "playing with God" which they even said for birth control and assisted suicide. They say any attempt to control their destiny or to shape lives in any ways is "playing with God". But diseases are a part of the human nature and usage of advance technology to prevent the diseases is certainly not going against God's will. Even cloning is not going against His will, but just an improvement on the mankind and is only an aid to life.
These religious points are so unjustified and so very untrue, people just have the idea still that cloning would be threatening morally and ethically. It is accepted that cloning will not be something natural, but still it will provide a great support to the infertile couples and would also be helpful to cure some life taking diseases. Hence the benefits of cloning are believed to overcome the unbelievable implications. Cloning will be only advancement of reproduction and health and is not against God's will. If God gave people rite to live brain to think and improve live, the He will not have anything against creation of new life, or saving life through this research. It is not the God's will, or any moral aspects which is stopping people or accepting cloning, but it is only the scientific advancement. There are numerous medical benefits which can be provided to the people, only if they are able to accept cloning with wide open arms rather than moving it apart just because it is unnatural.
Somehow if human cloning is banned then it will certainly not stop from happening, it would just legally move from the hands of respectable scientists to street. Banning of human cloning would only increase the black market of human embryos. Without considering the benefits which could be gained from it and banning human cloning would only make the wealthy criminals richer. Banning cloning would increase the life threaten. It would be the reason for the increase of life loss which would just travel along with it.
Research on animals always have shown that human cloning can be done with no huge physical risk to the child as with IVF when it was initially introduced. It would be really beneficial and supportive if these kinds of research is promoted and permitted to be done in countries like US, Canada, Europe or Japan. A couple who are extremely in need of a child will surely go to the researchers who actually have the capability. Advance Cell Technology (ACT) has already been able to create the first human embryo. The DNA for the purpose was taken from a man's legend was injected to a cow's egg with removed nucleus. The same kind of work was also reported in South Korea. It's a clear indication that someone is trying to clone a human with or without the government assistance. It would be best if the government doesn't outlaw cloning, and cloning research should be permitted. Outlawing research will certainly not stop it from happening.
The government should permit human cloning, because banning it will not be anything advantageous to them but will be something very disadvantageous. Banning cloning will stop benefits to people who actually are in need of it. Cloning would only lead to the better understanding of cell differentiation. This means it can be done to the organ which is needed to be transplanted and then heal the incurable disease, which in other word can be said as giving a new life to an existing human with genetic defects. Treating infertility is also another promising benefit which would be provided to the people, by allowing the infertile to still have their own child. Human cloning will be the most possible answer to some of this era's toughest problem, scientific being clearer. Hence by no means it should be stopped before even the people could at least get the chance to understand what they can get from it. Here I have provided all the major reason why cloning should not be banned and should be permitted, I hope you to have gained the right understanding of the remarkable new research. All the evidences I have presented are certainly more than enough to provide support for human cloning. Nevertheless, my strongest point is look into the pain and hurt on the parents who have lost their child cause of an incurable disease, whom they could have saved if cloning was made legal. Saving the life of one of these children is worthwhile attempt.