Should Cloning Be Permitted?


By: Junior Flores

E-mail: Snmc23@aol.com



Should Human Cloning Be Permitted? For years, part of the American public, and humans in general, have been fascinated with the possibility of creating human life by other than natural means. There are many who strongly disagree with the idea of human cloning. It certainly wasn't surprising when they were able to clone a sheep and will not be the least surprised if someday scientist's will be able to clone a human being. Should cloning for human benefits or even human cloning itself be allowed in society today? That is a question we must ask ourselves? On one side of the issue are those who believe that human cloning should be permitted. One thing that shows this, is what human cloning research may bring. Those who opposed to a ban believe that human cloning research could bring substantial benefits, including the development of new treatments for cystic fibrosis, other diseases and the ability to create animal with normal compatible organs for transplant. (1."Should Congress Prohibit All Human Cloning Experimentation",Pg 34). From my opinion, I believe that human cloning is just a huge step towards negativism in human life's, rather than simply being the next step in fertility technology. There might be a possibility that human cloning research may result in the discovery of a cure for diseases and the growing of human organs, but the disadvantages are that many years as well as money may be need it. Also several experts told the committee that cloning might be the only chance for many infertile couples to have their own genetically related children.(2.Gorman,Pg66). For what I see these cases are rarely seen, and the little amount of couples who suffer of infertility are more likely to adopt a child. Infertility, is not the cause. This is not the main reason why scientists are coming up with the idea of human cloning. What I believe is that scientists are just making propaganda in order to make the public to get on their side. Another reason is what could happened if cloning is ban. What about consequences of banning a technology- death, disease, disability, indignity, on happiness, and blighted life's that would result from imposing limits on cloning discoveries and advances (3.Bailey,Pg66). What might possibly happen if cloning is ban, scientist's as well as experts believe that efforts to ban cloning could drastically stop the creation of new medicines that would help millions of people. What I believe is that cloning might be a discovery for scientists to duplicate human life's. However, I certainly don't' believe that this discovery would go further than that. Simply for the cost and waste of time. Furthermore, Clinton took two swift steps: he called for moratorium on the use of federal funds for human cloning research and he asked his national biothetics advisory commission to let him know within 90 days whether the new technology should be even . more tightly controlled. (4.Gorman,Pg66). In my opinion, I state that, no matter who pays for it or for what reason is done, should be made a criminal offense in the U.S. The president doesn't have no right to spend federal funds in a research that most likely would be denied by congress, plus is just a waste of time and money. In addition, can poor people afford cloning. More likely, the cost of genetic treatments will drop substantially, and poor people in the future will be much richer than poor people today are, so they will easily take advantages of the new medical treatment. (5.Bailey,Pg66). This is a nonsense, no poor family is going to be richer , I mean how. In my point of view, I believe that they are going to be more poorer than they are. Simply because of their jobs, their job skills might not even be needed. Come on, be realistic technology is going to be more advanced and robots might even replaced their jobs. However, In the future this treatment is going to be more advanced, and the rich will take advantage of the new technologies, so their children will be smarter and free of diseases. Mean while, the poor will suffer of diseases and lack of learning. Moreover, the supporters for human cloning argue that human cloning should be allowed, as the research may have to potential to eliminate many of the world's problems such as animal extinction and can also benefit man kind in many ways. (6.'Should Human Cloning Be Allowed", Pg1). It has been said and debated that scientist should not take the work of god into their own hands, but if they do so, the only problem that they could cause, is that they could destroy the age old concept of "father and "mother". Finally the advantages of human cloning. Providing better research capabilities to find cures to many present diseases, bringing back friends or relatives who have passed away by cloning an identical copy, providing children for women who are single and do not wish to have artificial insemination, and the choice of physical characteristics (who to look like). (7."Should Human Cloning Be Allowed",Pg1). My view and thoughts to all this advantages are that human cloning may produce another "Hitler" and other racial violent conspirators. Secondly, human cloning is not at all "natural" meaning that a child born of cloning is not going to have the same thoughts and he or she are just going to be an unethical, immoral person and last but not least human cloning would alter the very meaning of humanity. On the other side there are many who correctly believe that human cloning should not be allowed. One thing that strongly disagrees is what possible consequence can be produced by cloning. A child born of cloning would face " An enormous weight of social and parental expectation about what and who that child should be". (8. Seppa,Pg367). From my opinion, I believe that a child born of cloning will react depending on it's environment. If the child is raised around scientist's and is treated as an experiment, the child most likely will ...