Brain
2009-07-26 21:05:55
The definition of life is, “The property or quality that distinguishes living organisms from dead organisms and inanimate matter, manifested in functions such as metabolism, growth, reproduction, and response to stimuli” (Best). It seems easy to distinguish something that is alive from something that is dead. However, how would we define being human? Humans are certainly alive, but what special qualities give us the distinction of humans? Do all humans have equal rights? Should they? These are fundamental questions of life, to which, everyone has their own explanation. Cloning continually perverts our views on how we define being human and how humans should be treated. Human cloning is an atrocious act, and it should be banned because; it is most likely impossible, it dilutes the human gene pool, and degenerates all the rights that we have as human beings.
Many people do believe that human cloning is a beneficial to humanity. There are a few main points to why we should develop cloning further. One point is the knowing and understanding of ourselves, as Richard Hull puts it, “We could master the genetic code”. If we master the genetic code, what advancements would come from it? We would be able to “weed out” bad genes, but is that right? Do we have the right to change a soon-to-be living person to fit our standards? That would be similar to Hitler, “weeding out” the Jewish from Germany. Mr. Hull also states that, “Cloning would be the cure to infertility”. To me, when an ailment is cured, it is fixed and you are back to normal. Cloning yourself and calling the clone your child is just lying to yourself, in fact, your child would simply be your sibling. These are some of cloning activists’ main ideas, but it seems to me, that this is irrational thinking.
However, there are many topics in opposition of cloning that make perfect sense to me. Creating clones of human beings is very complicated, and may not be possible. During the process of cloning there are many failures, and public outrage from the high rate of abortions would put regulations in effect to ban cloning (Cohen). Given the extremely high controversy over abortion itself, it is easy to see that cloning would quickly fall in value in the publics’ eye. Because of this, many people say that we are doing nothing but wasting precious time and money on the development. A cell’s spindles are the structures that pull the chromosomes apart into the two new cells during mitosis and meiosis (cellular division), and, “When trying to clone primates, cells deform and obtain random genes, attributed to the lack of spindles” (Cohen). A human normally has twenty-three pairs of chromosomes, if they are allowed to just fall in place by chance, they would be all miss-matched. Without the proper chromosomes the cell would die, and when too many of the cells die, the organism would die along with the cells. During the cloning process you put DNA into new cells, but this is putting, “Old DNA into a new organism…” and this would have many complications (reasons against cloning). The DNA would be older, so the cells would begin to degenerate faster, leading to pre-mature aging. Even the most popular success story for cloning (Dolly) was afflicted with this symptom, while she suffered from very early arthritis and heart conditions. For the most part, cloning will not be obtainable until technology is improved greatly, so for now, we are wasting time and money.
Although cloning may be difficult, if successful, it would have many other negative effects on society. Continuing the research of cloning and actually cloning people is not beneficial, in fact, it is harmful. It makes the human gene pool much smaller by not allowing new traits to arise. If we were to convert to cloning as a means of reproduction, “There would be no room for new traits to arise by mutation…The result: Human evolution is halted” (Mautner). If we were to stop evolution as we are now, it would have considerable drawbacks to all of humanity. With the increasing rate of pollution and destruction of the earth, there is only one place to move to, space. If we were to move into space, or at least travel through it for long periods of time, we would have to adapt (evolve), to either outer space itself, or a new planet. We would need to develop higher tolerances to radiation, withstand extreme heat and cold, and even possible vacuum. If we were to halt evolution now, in thousands of years, there would be no way to know how we could have been. It is possible that recombinant DNA, left over from cloning, could join with a virus or any other cell, to create new stains of the virus, and new diseases (Fox). Is maybe saving hundreds of lives, worth creating a virus that could kill millions? With the genetic diversity of the population dwindling, this “super virus” would be even more effective, infecting countless numbers of people. Sexual reproduction in a large community is a very essential life process to increase the genetic diversity of the population by randomly distributing the genes to offspring. Cloning, however, does not recombine randomly, in fact, it does not recombine at all, it is the exact same as the parent cells, thus, “…reducing the biological genetic diversity of a population” (Mautner). If the diversity were to be diluted by the lack of genetic re-combination, everyone would have very similar genes. If a virus was to come along and it was specific to a gene, everyone would have that gene. Therefore, everybody would be very susceptible to that virus, and whole communities could be wiped out. Cloning anything will only hurt the species, by not allowing it to evolve and adapt it to an ever-changing environment.
Not only will cloning hurt the populous physically, it will pervert our views on humanity itself. Cloning humans would take away fundamental rights we all should have as human beings. “Even dire human suffering does not justify the extinguishing of another’s life” (Best). This is the most selfish act that one human can do to another, making someone give up his/her own life, unwillingly, to ease yours. With cloning readily available many people would be tempted to take this option. “A clone is human, and we do not go around cutting out people’s organs for our own use” (Kilner). Creating a clone of yourself does not entitle you to the ownership of that person and his organs. If that were true, then cloning would only be making yourself a slave, for yourself. Would this also justify taking your children’s organs with out consent if you needed them? You helped create them too, this is just a fancy way of exchanging one life for another. Cloning would, “…degenerate the dignity of being human by making life only to manipulate it” for your own gains and uses (Best). How would you feel if you were born only to be the “spare parts” for someone that was genetically the same as you? That there was no chance of a future for you, the only purpose in your meaningless life is to look forward to getting a vital organ taken out of you, and then ceasing to exist. This is not how anything is meant to live a life. Cloning will only damage all of human society by making us re-define all of our basic rights.
Cloning has such overwhelming drawbacks, that it is hard to even consider allowing it to advance. We should not allow a procedure that is a waist of time and money, makes the gene pool smaller, and obscures many of our human rights to continue to be developed and executed. Cloning would cause a great deal in suffering when new viruses are created, and everyone is more susceptible to every illness, it would pervert rights that everyone should have as human beings, and halt all chances of further evolving the human race. Cloning humans would effect everybody in existence in a negative way, it would even harm everyone not yet conceived.
Best, Robert. “All Forms of Human Cloning Should be Banned.” Genetic Engineering. Ed. Louise Gerdes. San Diego, CA: Greenhaven, 2005. Opposing Viewpoints Resource Center. Thomas Gale. Bison Library, Great Falls, MT. 22 Feb. 2006. <http://galenet.galegroup.com>.
Cohen, Philip. “Cloning Humans May Be Impossible.” Human Reproductive Cloning Currently Impossible. Ed. John Woodward. Business Publishing Ltd. 2003. Opposing Viewpoints Resource Center. Thomas Gale. Bison Library, Great Falls, MT. 12 Feb. 2006. <http://galenet.galegroup.com>.
Fox, Michael. “Genetic Engineering is Dangerous.” Animal Experimentation. Ed. Helen Cothron. Animals’ Agenda. 2001. Opposing Viewpoints Resource Center. Thomas Gale. Bison Library, Great Falls, MT. 10 Feb. 2006. <http://galenet.galegroup.com>.
Holm, Soren. “Cloning Could Place an Unfair Burden on Clones.” Ethics of Human Cloning. Ed. William Dudley. Cambridge University, 1998. Opposing Viewpoints Resource Center. Thomas Gale. Bison Library, Great Falls, MT. 12 Feb. 2006. <http://galenet.galegroup.com>.
Hull, Richard. “The Benefits of Cloning Outweigh the Risks.” Biomedical Ethics. Ed. Tamara Roleff. San Diego, CA: Greenhaven Press, 1998. Opposing Viewpoints Resource Center. Thomas Gale. Bison Library, Great Falls, MT. 27 Feb. 2006. <http://galenet.galegroup.com>.
Kilner, John. “Cloning Technology Would not Benefit Humans.” Biomedical Ethics. Ed. Roman Espejo. San Diego, CA: Greenhaven, 2003. Opposing Viewpoints Resource Center. Thomas Gale. Bison Library, Great Falls, MT. 22 Feb. 2006. <http://galenet.galegroup.com>.
Mautner, Michael. “Cloning Could Halt Human Evolution.” Will Cloning End Human Evolution? San Diego, CA: Greenhaven, 2003. Opposing Viewpoints Resource Center. Thomas Gale. Bison Library, Great Falls, MT. 22 Feb. 2006. <http://galenet.galegroup.com>.
“Reasons Against Cloning.” 2003. Global Change. 2 Feb. 2006. <http://globalchange.com/noclones.htm>.
Many people do believe that human cloning is a beneficial to humanity. There are a few main points to why we should develop cloning further. One point is the knowing and understanding of ourselves, as Richard Hull puts it, “We could master the genetic code”. If we master the genetic code, what advancements would come from it? We would be able to “weed out” bad genes, but is that right? Do we have the right to change a soon-to-be living person to fit our standards? That would be similar to Hitler, “weeding out” the Jewish from Germany. Mr. Hull also states that, “Cloning would be the cure to infertility”. To me, when an ailment is cured, it is fixed and you are back to normal. Cloning yourself and calling the clone your child is just lying to yourself, in fact, your child would simply be your sibling. These are some of cloning activists’ main ideas, but it seems to me, that this is irrational thinking.
However, there are many topics in opposition of cloning that make perfect sense to me. Creating clones of human beings is very complicated, and may not be possible. During the process of cloning there are many failures, and public outrage from the high rate of abortions would put regulations in effect to ban cloning (Cohen). Given the extremely high controversy over abortion itself, it is easy to see that cloning would quickly fall in value in the publics’ eye. Because of this, many people say that we are doing nothing but wasting precious time and money on the development. A cell’s spindles are the structures that pull the chromosomes apart into the two new cells during mitosis and meiosis (cellular division), and, “When trying to clone primates, cells deform and obtain random genes, attributed to the lack of spindles” (Cohen). A human normally has twenty-three pairs of chromosomes, if they are allowed to just fall in place by chance, they would be all miss-matched. Without the proper chromosomes the cell would die, and when too many of the cells die, the organism would die along with the cells. During the cloning process you put DNA into new cells, but this is putting, “Old DNA into a new organism…” and this would have many complications (reasons against cloning). The DNA would be older, so the cells would begin to degenerate faster, leading to pre-mature aging. Even the most popular success story for cloning (Dolly) was afflicted with this symptom, while she suffered from very early arthritis and heart conditions. For the most part, cloning will not be obtainable until technology is improved greatly, so for now, we are wasting time and money.
Although cloning may be difficult, if successful, it would have many other negative effects on society. Continuing the research of cloning and actually cloning people is not beneficial, in fact, it is harmful. It makes the human gene pool much smaller by not allowing new traits to arise. If we were to convert to cloning as a means of reproduction, “There would be no room for new traits to arise by mutation…The result: Human evolution is halted” (Mautner). If we were to stop evolution as we are now, it would have considerable drawbacks to all of humanity. With the increasing rate of pollution and destruction of the earth, there is only one place to move to, space. If we were to move into space, or at least travel through it for long periods of time, we would have to adapt (evolve), to either outer space itself, or a new planet. We would need to develop higher tolerances to radiation, withstand extreme heat and cold, and even possible vacuum. If we were to halt evolution now, in thousands of years, there would be no way to know how we could have been. It is possible that recombinant DNA, left over from cloning, could join with a virus or any other cell, to create new stains of the virus, and new diseases (Fox). Is maybe saving hundreds of lives, worth creating a virus that could kill millions? With the genetic diversity of the population dwindling, this “super virus” would be even more effective, infecting countless numbers of people. Sexual reproduction in a large community is a very essential life process to increase the genetic diversity of the population by randomly distributing the genes to offspring. Cloning, however, does not recombine randomly, in fact, it does not recombine at all, it is the exact same as the parent cells, thus, “…reducing the biological genetic diversity of a population” (Mautner). If the diversity were to be diluted by the lack of genetic re-combination, everyone would have very similar genes. If a virus was to come along and it was specific to a gene, everyone would have that gene. Therefore, everybody would be very susceptible to that virus, and whole communities could be wiped out. Cloning anything will only hurt the species, by not allowing it to evolve and adapt it to an ever-changing environment.
Not only will cloning hurt the populous physically, it will pervert our views on humanity itself. Cloning humans would take away fundamental rights we all should have as human beings. “Even dire human suffering does not justify the extinguishing of another’s life” (Best). This is the most selfish act that one human can do to another, making someone give up his/her own life, unwillingly, to ease yours. With cloning readily available many people would be tempted to take this option. “A clone is human, and we do not go around cutting out people’s organs for our own use” (Kilner). Creating a clone of yourself does not entitle you to the ownership of that person and his organs. If that were true, then cloning would only be making yourself a slave, for yourself. Would this also justify taking your children’s organs with out consent if you needed them? You helped create them too, this is just a fancy way of exchanging one life for another. Cloning would, “…degenerate the dignity of being human by making life only to manipulate it” for your own gains and uses (Best). How would you feel if you were born only to be the “spare parts” for someone that was genetically the same as you? That there was no chance of a future for you, the only purpose in your meaningless life is to look forward to getting a vital organ taken out of you, and then ceasing to exist. This is not how anything is meant to live a life. Cloning will only damage all of human society by making us re-define all of our basic rights.
Cloning has such overwhelming drawbacks, that it is hard to even consider allowing it to advance. We should not allow a procedure that is a waist of time and money, makes the gene pool smaller, and obscures many of our human rights to continue to be developed and executed. Cloning would cause a great deal in suffering when new viruses are created, and everyone is more susceptible to every illness, it would pervert rights that everyone should have as human beings, and halt all chances of further evolving the human race. Cloning humans would effect everybody in existence in a negative way, it would even harm everyone not yet conceived.
Works Cited
Best, Robert. “All Forms of Human Cloning Should be Banned.” Genetic Engineering. Ed. Louise Gerdes. San Diego, CA: Greenhaven, 2005. Opposing Viewpoints Resource Center. Thomas Gale. Bison Library, Great Falls, MT. 22 Feb. 2006. <http://galenet.galegroup.com>.
Cohen, Philip. “Cloning Humans May Be Impossible.” Human Reproductive Cloning Currently Impossible. Ed. John Woodward. Business Publishing Ltd. 2003. Opposing Viewpoints Resource Center. Thomas Gale. Bison Library, Great Falls, MT. 12 Feb. 2006. <http://galenet.galegroup.com>.
Fox, Michael. “Genetic Engineering is Dangerous.” Animal Experimentation. Ed. Helen Cothron. Animals’ Agenda. 2001. Opposing Viewpoints Resource Center. Thomas Gale. Bison Library, Great Falls, MT. 10 Feb. 2006. <http://galenet.galegroup.com>.
Holm, Soren. “Cloning Could Place an Unfair Burden on Clones.” Ethics of Human Cloning. Ed. William Dudley. Cambridge University, 1998. Opposing Viewpoints Resource Center. Thomas Gale. Bison Library, Great Falls, MT. 12 Feb. 2006. <http://galenet.galegroup.com>.
Hull, Richard. “The Benefits of Cloning Outweigh the Risks.” Biomedical Ethics. Ed. Tamara Roleff. San Diego, CA: Greenhaven Press, 1998. Opposing Viewpoints Resource Center. Thomas Gale. Bison Library, Great Falls, MT. 27 Feb. 2006. <http://galenet.galegroup.com>.
Kilner, John. “Cloning Technology Would not Benefit Humans.” Biomedical Ethics. Ed. Roman Espejo. San Diego, CA: Greenhaven, 2003. Opposing Viewpoints Resource Center. Thomas Gale. Bison Library, Great Falls, MT. 22 Feb. 2006. <http://galenet.galegroup.com>.
Mautner, Michael. “Cloning Could Halt Human Evolution.” Will Cloning End Human Evolution? San Diego, CA: Greenhaven, 2003. Opposing Viewpoints Resource Center. Thomas Gale. Bison Library, Great Falls, MT. 22 Feb. 2006. <http://galenet.galegroup.com>.
“Reasons Against Cloning.” 2003. Global Change. 2 Feb. 2006. <http://globalchange.com/noclones.htm>.