However, if we are to venture into cloning we must make many precautions. Such cloning holds no therapeutic value whatsoever for the clonal embryo as, far from benefitting from the research, the embryo is destroyed in it. The idea of the manufacture of such a magnificent thing as a human life purely for the purpose of conducting research is grotesque, at best.
At this point, I believe we should not use cloning. In addition, researchers at Stanford University have announced their intention to create cloned human embryos for research. The moral problem with making embryos for research is that as a society we do not want to see embryos treated as products or mere objects for fear that we will cheapen the value of parenting, risk commercializing procreation and trivialize the act of procreation.
The recent succession of advances in non-embryonic stem cell research indicate that we have not yet reached that point of determination.
Are disagreements over cloning basically a clash of religion and science? Some surviving cloned cattle, however, do appear physiologically similar to their uncloned counterparts, and at least one cloned sheep Dolly and some cloned cows have given birth to offspring.
The United States can do a great deal to either reinforce or else undermine [what constitutes acceptable scientific and medical research].
Disagreements over the ethical and policy positions regarding human cloning do not seem to fall along lines of science and religion. Of all human beings, embryos are the most defenseless against abuse.
These members point to concerns about our obligations to nascent human life; the crossing of an important moral boundary through the creation of human life expressly and exclusively for the purpose of its use in research; and possible further moral harms to our society.
Given the high rates of morbidity and mortality in the cloning of other mammals, cloning-to-produce-children would be extremely unsafe, and, as such, attempts to produce a cloned child would be highly unethical.
In the 19th century, vulnerable human beings were bought and sold in the town square as slaves and bred as though they were animals.
The moral outcry against this aspect of the proposal, however, was almost universal. Though both seek a ban on what is being called "reproductive" cloning--in which a clonal human embryo is implanted in a woman with the intent that a cloned human being will be born--they differ dramatically with respect to what is being termed "therapeutic" cloning.
Finally, a moratorium, rather than a lasting ban, signals a high regard for the value of biomedical research and an enduring concern for patients and families whose suffering such research may help alleviate.
Can two people share the one soul? If they are treated well, they will likely lead equally happy lives as normal people. Should cloning for human benefits or even human cloning itself be allowed in society today?
To ignore this responsibility would be to engage in morally unacceptable age discrimination, resulting in the disregard for and destruction of human life based solely on its developmental stage. Any being that is human is a human being.
Beyond those safety issues, the Council holds that cloning-to-produce-children would be a radically new form of human procreation that leads to concerns about: To achieve this end, we believe that a comprehensive ban prohibiting both "reproductive" and "therapeutic" cloning is needed.
The pursuit of therapies for human disease and disability via "therapeutic" cloning would likely leave many Americans without acceptable means to relieve their suffering.
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. Our nation is on the cusp of reaping the long dreamed-of rewards from our significant investment in biomedical research.
Even something we typically associate as "bad" - for example, outrage - can be used for good - outrage against injustice. That some individuals would be destroyed in the name of medical science constitutes a threat to us all.
A clonal embryo is produced with the "therapeutic" intent of producing tissue needed to save the life of a seriously ill child. Human beings have a right not to be created for purposes of experimentation. Is cloning fair to cloned humans? See Chapters 4 and 6 of the report.Whether or not popular opinion is the best stand for this controversy is addressed by attempting to answer the above questions and to conclude whether or not human reproductive cloning should be effectively banned.
This is an attempt to explore the pros and cons of human cloning and to provide enough information of both sides of the arguments in order for the reader to make their own informed decision on whether human cloning is ethical or not.
The issue at hand is should human cloning be allowed in a society that seeks immortality in the name of science. I believe cloning is an evolutionary dead end and the use of cloning techniques to make ideal human would ultimately devalue life.
However, the question of whether to allow this type of human experiment will remain unanswered. I. - As technological advancement grow, scientists begin to speculate the realistic doing of human cloning, as this happens opposing groups and organizations raise their voice against it and create the question whether scientists should be allowed to clone humans, the promise of cloning at any level can revolutionize the world, and change it for.
The overwhelming consensus in this country that human reproductive cloning should not be permitted necessitates a ban on both reproductive and "therapeutic" cloning. An overwhelming majority of scientists, lawyers, health care professionals, ethicists and the general public has spoken out strongly against creating a human baby via what is.
Should human cloning be permitted? Asked by: Bruinshockeyfan. Add a New Topic; Add to My Favorites Debate This Topic; Report This Topic; Should human cloning be permitted? If the question asks whether human beings should be cloned, as I am supposing that it does, then my answer is a resounding no.
The random assortment of .Download