Yueh-Ting Tsai

Period 3A
12/7/13

Cloning argumentative essay

To consider the cloning of another human seemed impossible, but now that it
is possible and we all know it there are many questions like if it should be
legalized or banned. Does the decision be judged by one person because of
what he thinks? Or should it be judged as a huge society because it will
affect everyone and not just that person?

But before we had the technology; it was thought to be that the ability to
clone an adult human was impossible. But that has all changed with Dolly
the sheep (the first mammal to be successfully cloned) and the great
advances in the field of Embryology and genetic screening. These advances
are leading the way to clone humans, which brings up many new
complicated questions that stop the idea from spreading. As with any
scientific or technological advance, it brings around questions that I feel
must be answered should it be legalized and if it is will it be a new step in
human life or will it be devastating to all of the human race.

People say and strongly believe that biologists are cloning human
embryos only to see how far they can push the scientific barriers. However
not all things are bad and corrupt, I believe, as do the leaders of Great
Britain, that it is possible that the reasons behind Human Cloning,
Embryology and genetic screening may be a life saving idea. Cloning could

Yueh-Ting Tsai
Period 3A
12/7/13

help improve the life of future generations. Although I still prefer the idea of
these scientists spending all this money and their effort on finding a cure for
a disease that has or will affect many of us in one way or another for
example cancer and many others. I still keep an open mind about this
subject as most of the embryologists and biologist's claim that they are
doing this as they feel that they have a duty to the improvement of our
society, or even perhaps a moral obligation. To this end the techniques have
been offered to society as an option for the improvement of humanity. The
human race is in the early stages of defining human cloning and what it
means. The human race is defining it as a science as opposed to an art or
religion, specifically a kind of science that is called Biotechnology.
Biotechnology is the study into the design and manufacture of the human
body. The basis of cloning revolves around somatic cell nucleus transfer,
where the nucleus of one cell is inserted into another cell whose nucleus has
been removed. This procedure has recently been enhanced, allowing this
transfer to occur between adult cells. Before becoming mature cells,
embryonic cells have the potential to become any type of cell if a certain
stimulus is present. The pre-adult cells are manipulated when they are able
to be changed by another stimulus cell, transforming and creating an exact
copy. When we see that cloning is nothing more than an advanced scientific
process, we see that it is a well thought out technique that holds great
potential. But for this process it would need vey advanced equipment and
technology.

Yueh-Ting Tsai
Period 3A
12/7/13

I believe that we must all ask ourselves what this mean. Should it be allowed
and is it right? A Time Magazine poll (March 10th, 1997) reported that 74% of
those asked believe that it is against God's will to clone humans. However,
thinking that cloning humans is playing God is not actually true as no one
can actually prove what God's intentions were when crating the earth and
the creatures on it? There is substantial disagreement as to what God' s will
is, but what I find interesting in this argument is something I firmly believe,
after taking all this information in and weighting the positive and negative
aspects of human cloning, that it is a decision of difficulty. Human cloning
and cloning research shouldn't be made illegal because it may provide a cure
for cancer, it probably will provide a valuable basic research and possible
spin off technologies related to reproduction, development, and cures for
deadly diseases, and finally prohibiting it would violate the fundamental
freedom of scientific inquiry and for the human species to advance. This
would only cause controversy and confusion of what is really at stake.
What is the opposition to cloning? There are three basic arguments: cloning
is not natural; it has potential for misuse; and it's immoral.

The idea that cloning is unnatural is the most absurd argument. The idea of
"playing God" and "changing the way things should be done" is the most

Yueh-Ting Tsai
Period 3A
12/7/13

debated topic for anti-cloners. Environmentalist Jeremy Rifkin implies that

cloning "throws every convention, every historical tradition, up for grabs." In
other words, if humans no longer come from two humans, what is going on?
Well, what is unnatural? Why is it bad as soon as cloning emerges? Cloning
may be un-natural, but only "in the sense that it is not the process by which
humans ordinarily procreate," says Brown. The problem with the argument
that cloning is unnatural is that many things today are not natural: disease
vaccinations, trips to the doctor, your house, even the clothes you wear. If
we were to travel back to "natural," we would never have any creations to
improve life. Brown also discusses the "unnaturalness" of cloning, saying,
"Certainly no one would argue that we would be better off if we had
remained strictly hunters and gatherers, yet they do argue that science must
be halted." Those who endorse this argument should have no right, then, to
be in a house, wear clothes, or use technology.
This may seem a bit drastic, but this is the nature of the argument against
cloning. Any ideas to improve things would be outlawed. Since the discovery
of the wheel, we became unnatural. This argument seems foolish. What if
man was never to fight plagues, improve daily life, or advance
technologically just because the practice is not natural? This cannot be held
against cloning because we have been unnatural" for thousands of years!
Another major argument against cloning is that it will be misused if the
wrong people get hold of it. This drawback is true, but only to the extent that
everything around us has potential of misuse when put in the wrong hands. If

Yueh-Ting Tsai
Period 3A
12/7/13

we give cloning power to am adman, we might see cloning with negative

outcomes. Contrasting this, if cloning is correctly utilized, the positive
possibilities are endless. Thus, this argument is ineffective since this scenario
can occur with any advancement. This argument is just a "what if"
statement: What if cloning gets out offhand? What if we clone a notorious
killer? What if? When used correctly, cloning is expected to greatly benefit
mankind," assures Dr. Seed (The Benefits of Cloning).

The answers to many of the common problems faced today are all curable
through cloning procedures. For example, we see the high number of donors
needed for the many patients seeking transplants. Cloning would end the
wait for trans-plants since what is needed could be repaired with one healthy
organ, may-be even the patient's organ. "Diabetics could get insulinproducing cells transplanted into their pancreas, or heart attack victims
could get heart tissue replacements," explains Brown. The point is that many
of today's common medical problems have the potential for healing. Cloning
is the answer.

The last argument is the claim that cloning is immoral. Why? If aclone is
basically an identical twin separated by time, it is nothing but a human.
Some fear human cloning would render the clone a mere organ factory,
which is immoral. But if clones are treated as regular human beings, then
they, too, would have civil rights. Therefore anyone who violated the rights of

Yueh-Ting Tsai
Period 3A
12/7/13

a clone would be treated as any criminal violating human rights.

Each argument against cloning seems not to endanger the public, but
concerns an ethical type of danger the anti-cloners worry about. The future
of the human race may be dependent on whether or not cloning will be
accepted. New technology has always had difficulty being accepted, with
obstacles to face and things to prove, but most, once accepted, prove
beneficial.

As always there are the negative aspects: with genetic engineering and
human cloning it is possible to use these in the arsenal of ethnic cleansing
creating inequality in our society which would be the beginning of many
wars, and that's something that the scientist, biologists and embryologists,
as well me, don't want to see. All I can say is "is it right?" I say yes, but that
is not for me to decide that is up to the individual.