Is cloning for the human race ever
by 09S61 CHIO TSE NING JAMIEN
0.0 stars - reviews
range from 0 to 5
Is cloning for the human race ever
SV2: Technical and economic barriers need a
consideration in cloning human organs for transplant.
Cloned organs may not be cost-effective for a good
part of human society.
Cloning anything, be it organs or human embryos are extremely expensive. for example, In
vitro fertilization clinics will generally pay an egg donor $3,000 to $5,000, and a cloning
company, Advanced Cell Technology took 71 eggs from seven women. Scientists will almost
certainly use fewer eggs if therapeutic cloning is used on people. But even if it required a
mere 100 eggs, taken from ten donors, the cost of simply paying the donors could easily
reach $50,000. On top of that, there would be medical costs involved in procuring the egg.
With such a high cost pegged to cloning, the benefits of cloning will
certainly not be able to impact the human race. It will just exemplify the
income inequality between the rich and the poor. The exorbitant price
tag of cloning will become a barrier for the low income group in the
human race. Cloned organs will be out of their reach as they cannot
This will drive a wedge in the rich-poor divide in the human race.
The poor will be unable to access the positive benefits that
cloning has to offer. When there is this divide between people in
different income levels, the tension may begin to fragment
SV 1: Cloning leads to a homogeneous
human race, thus violating the basic
principle of humanity because it leads to a
reduction in biological diversity of human
. Cloning leads to the reproduction of a being having exactly the same characteristics as another. If
everyone desires to clone the identical perfect human with the much coveted after characteristics,
everyone would be a replica of another. The celebrated differences between humans which contribute
to our vibrancy will then be eliminated. These differences are deeply ingrained in us and is an essential
part of our culture. Therefore, each loses their sense of individuality, which without these unique
personalities, life would be much less dynamic and the world would be dominated by only one facet of
human personality. In addition, human biological diversity is considered a fundamental part of human
natural heritage, and diversity is recognised as part of the concept of human dignity in the Universal
Declaration on Human Genome and Human Rights. Thus, since the basis of procreation is to ensure
diversity in human population and this very technology goes against the grains of humanity and the
dignity each human is entitled to. Cloning cannot be justifiable if it does not fulfill the basic definition
For example, scientists estimate that if humans were to
continue with reproductive cloning, mankind would
eventually be dominated by the same superior species of
the same personality by 2070.
OV 1: Cloning brings hope to
While many have claimed that cloning human
beings would violate human dignity, i feel that
many of these fears that people have are
misplaced. It is, indeed another method of
creating human life with the involvement of
scientic intervention, rather than life resulting
from natural means.
Through artificial insemination, and in
vitro fertilisation techniques, infertile
couples can have children with the
use of cloned embryos. This is
thought to be an ideal way to create
children which would not have
existed, as opposed to couples going
through the mental and physical
effort biologically. Hence, even as
many oppose to cloning as an affront
to human dignity or objecting it on a
basis of it being unnatural, one
should also consider that cloning is
just as "unnatural" and "unethical" as
abortion whereby women destroy
embryos or even the use of
antibiotics which is argued to be an
artificial way of prolonging life.
Furthermore, even as potential
embryos are sacrificed in the process
itself, cloning should be justified
because the IVF technology is used
to create many human embryos
which are then implanted in human
bodies which lead to lifes being
formed. This is also amplified by the
fact that the Eastern culture
emphazises that life is constantly
recycled and reincarnated.
No doubt cloning practices is
playing God, it is certainly
SV 3: Cloning has blurred our
moral values and our sense
-Designer babes could be created through cloning
-These babies are able to possess certain desired characteristics that parents may request for through the use of high technology
-They are defined as:a baby whose genetic makeup has been artificially selected by genetic engineering combined with in vitro fertilization to ensure the presence or absence of particular genes or characteristics
-For example, you might pursue physical attractiveness on your child’s behalf by using a somatic cell from Angelina Jolie or Brad Pitt.
- We need to pause and think through the moral and ethical limits that apply to the selection of our children’s genes or characteristics.
- Those who hope to clone designer babies should look at genetic determinist misrepresentations of the technology.
- Genetic determinism is the view that an organism’s significant characteristics result mainly from the action of its genes, with environmental influences playing a negligible role.
- One has failed to recognise the ethical implications of cloning.
- Going against nature and altering part of human cycle.
- The child is not produced naturally
- There are major concerns about the health of clones. Animal clones suffer from a variety of problems that some scientists link to incomplete and improper cloning. Hence
there is a likelihood that human clones could suffer from these problems as well.
As a result of all these negative implications of cloning, it suggests to us that cloning for the human race is not justifiable. Not only it is going against nature, it does not make sense to take the risk of a problematic case after cloning. Most importantly, the creation of 'fake' babies causes us to lose humanity because it involves the modification of human genes. This genetic enhancement may even lead to a discriminatory society.
OV 2: Cloning improves humanity's
standard of living, increasing the state of
technology in our daily lives.
Proponents of stem-cell cloning argue that it
could do wonders for the pharmeceutical
Through therapeutic cloning, scientists can harvest stem cells which can in
turn be used to produce organs which can be inserted into the human body
without fear of tissue rejection, as cells could differentiate the unique cells
of the human body. This could allow and exponential increase in the
success of organ transplant surgeries, bringing hope to the organ transplant
This tremendous form of benefit that cloning
could give should not be neglected while
arguing against it. As while potential lives
are sacrificed, we must not forget that it
saves existing human life, hence its ability
to prolong life is undisputed.
Temporarily putting aside the controversies of cloning, we consider the enomormous potential
benefits of it. Hence coming to a moral judgement, we must not fail to consider this. Cloning being a
double edged sword has indeed its controversies, however proponents have felt that the cost of a
total ban is indeed too great. The denying of dying and hopeless patients and helpless hospitals
with neverending lists of patients waiting for organ transplants from this, one can conclude that
denying the domination of science over ethics because of moral concerns is therefore considered
even more unethical than this practice of cloning itself.
Yet, in certain circumstances, people are caught in a dilemma and tug of war
situation as cloning of designer babies could be used to save lifes through possessing
desired characteristics of body parts that a dying person may require. Nevertheless,
in such circumstances, it is grossly unfair to the designer baby and once again,
ethical issues involved are highly debatable. Cloning has led to an increase in grey
areas of moral issues. Hence, we believe that cloning for the human race is desirable
to a certain extent, but the costs of cloning definitely outweights the benefits as we
have to take moral issues like reduction of biodiversity and possible discrimination into