An argument against the science of human cloning

The expressions of fear, disgust, and moral outrage appeared immediately; in response, highly illiberal laws were enacted without due consideration of the issues. Since then, the fear-mongering has partly died down, but not before a great deal of draconian legislation was enacted across the world.

The tacit implication here is that cloning is desirable because it somehow presents a way to cheat death. The case against cloning The actual arguments against human cloning are extremely varied, and I cannot elaborate them all here.

There is an urgent need to think through the relevant ethical issues. And it is this claim that we reject They also argue that all beings capable of experiencing something deserve to be elevated to this threshold if they are not at it, typically stating that the underlying change that leads to the threshold is an increase in the preciseness of the brain 's ability to discriminate.

Further, this argument appropriates the phrase "genetically related" to embrace a condition that has never before occurred in human history, one which abolishes the genetic variations that have always existed between parent and child.

Intelligent designer The contemporary intelligent design movement formulates its arguments in secular terms and intentionally avoids identifying the intelligent agent or agents they posit. Although they do not state that God is the designer, the designer is often implicitly hypothesized to have intervened in a way that only a god could intervene.

Cloning and Embryonic Stem Cells

Herein lies the danger of autonomy-based thinking, a danger that is similar to that attending a utility-oriented outlook. We do not claim that cloning is wrong, but that making it available to people might lead to worse consequences than prohibiting it, and that since there is no right to clone it is appropriate to take these consequences into account when considering whether to prohibit it.

Ultimately, it seems that we must choose between rejecting many of our procreative practices as morally problematic or conceding that reproductive cloning is acceptable.

Needless to say, it is impossible to obtain a clone's consent to be brought into existence through cloning. Because both our environment and our genetics substantially influence who we are, the embryo will not become the same person as the adult.

Murray goes on to stress that, due to varying other influences outside of genetic duplication, a clone would not, in fact, be a mere copy of its genetic predecessor. Monotheism is the thesis that the universe is affected by a single supernatural agent, God. President Clinton, who quickly banned the use of federal funds for human cloning research, and by the World Health Organization, who summarily labeled human cloning ethically unacceptable.

Some theorists such as Ray Kurzweil think that the pace of technological innovation is accelerating and that the next 50 years may yield not only radical technological advances, but possibly a technological singularitywhich may fundamentally change the nature of human beings.

Why did these individuals regard the recreation of the same DNA to equate to the recreation of the same entity that had died. If cloning an existing person is acceptable here, this counterexample shows there is no valid dignity argument against cloning.

National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke. Reproductive cloning would allow lesbians to have a child without having to use donor sperm, and gay men to have a child that does not have genes derived from an egg donor though, of course, a surrogate would have to carry the pregnancy.

There was a problem providing the content you requested

Such confusion would not warrant a prohibition on cloning. Rights are socially negotiated, and no "right" to clone oneself has ever been established. Indeed, we have been frustrated in efforts to clone other primates such as apes and monkeys.

The successful cloning of household pets holds special significance in that, when discussing the circumstances that led to their cloning, we can begin to discuss the ethical issues that arise in human reproductive cloning. But if some people are in a very weak position economically or socially or physically, they may not be able to avail themselves of the same opportunities, even if under more equitable circumstances they would surely want to do so.

These thinkers argue that the ability to discuss in a falsification-based way constitutes a threshold that is not arbitrary at which it becomes possible for an individual to speak for themself in a way that is not dependent on exterior assumptions.

Across the world, many countries banned human cloning - often with significant punishments, such as lengthy jail terms, even for attempting such a thing. However, the strongest evidence against this claim is the existence of identical multiples, who are, in essence, clones of nature Pence, ; Gould, The embryos are then transferred into a womb and, upon successful implantation and gestation, are born as identical multiples.

The present can affect a future event, but it cannot "change" a future event. For example, though most sets of monozygotic twins share much of their nurturing environment, no twin will have exactly the nurturing environment of her genetically identical sibling.

Reality consists ultimately of matter and energy and their fundamentally lawlike and unwilled relations in space-time. Fortunately, it is well within our grasp to ensure that it does.

Never let me clone?: Countering an ethical argument against the reproductive cloning of humans

In fact, Richard Seed, in one of his first in-depth interviews after announcing his intentions to clone human beings commercially, made this very argument.

If the resultant beings will generally have lives worth living there is a prima facie case for allowing cloning. Intelligent design (ID) is a pseudoscientific argument for the existence of God, presented by its proponents as "an evidence-based scientific theory about life's origins".

Proponents claim that "certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection." ID is a form of creationism that lacks empirical.

The Pro Life Argument Against Abortion - Abortion is defined as the termination of a pregnancy after, accompanied by, resulting in, or closely followed by the death of. But cloning research continued after this discovery, and many scientists and ethicists have argued that iPS cells cannot replace cloning and other forms of embryonic stem (ES) cell research, since it is still not clear what types of cells will, in the end, work best for research and therapy.

There was a problem providing the content you requested

No one is denying that atheists are able to reason and use laws of logic. The point is that if atheism were true, the atheist would not be able to reason or use laws. Sep 07,  · The abortion debate asks whether it can be morally right to terminate a pregnancy before normal childbirth.

Cloning and Embryonic Stem Cells

Some people think that abortion is always wrong. Some think that abortion is. Should we ban human cloning? Arguments against cloning.

the are plenty of argument against human cloning -especially humans -ranging I don't need a PHD in science to know that if you take something away from nature, you eventually have to give it back. What Im trying to say is that with cloning life, this earth and us as humans will.

An argument against the science of human cloning
Rated 5/5 based on 100 review
Tech and Science