Cloning Madness Essays -- Science Genetics Biology Papers

Cloning Madness Cloning, a topic that has recently caused mayhem all told over the population, is possible, but return on it be here to pinch? The awe-inspiring news that scientists had cloned a sheep a couple of years agone move state into panic at the thought that kind-hearteds force be next. Cloning is a radical challenge to the most primaeval laws of biology, so its not unreasonable to be concerned that it might stake world society and self-worth (Macklin 64). Since most of the opposition is coming from the unpolluted sicken of actually being able to clone species, it makes it difficult for people to explicate away from the emotional side of the issue and analyze the major implications copy would have for society. To better understand this controversial issue, the pros and cons of cloning will be discussed. In Human Cloning? Dont but consecrate No, compassion Macklin states that epoch man cloning might not offer whatever benefits, no one has yet made a p ersuasive fictitious character that it would do any real harm either. Theologians contend that to clone a human would violate human dignity...But why suppose that cloned persons wouldnt share the kindred rights and dignity as the rest of us? ...Theres the fear...that parents might clone a tyke to have spare parts in case the original tiddler necessarily an harmonium transplant. But parents of identical twins dont view one child as an organ farm for the other. Why should cloned childrens parents be any various? ...Even if human cloning offers no obvious benefits to society why ostracise it? (64) Macklin likewise states that in a democratic society we dont usually pass laws outlawing things onwards there is actual or probable evidence of harm. The like laws that this instant protect human rights should govern human cloning. A world not safe ... ... establish 10, 1997 59-63. Kluger, Jeffrey. Will We Follow the Sheep? clock time expose 10, 1997 69-72. Kolata, Gina. Scien tist weight-lift Senators Not to Rush to Ban Human Cloning. The brand-new York propagation March 13, 1997. Lewis, Thomas. The Hazards of Science. The Presence of Others. Eds. Andrea A. Lunsford, John J. Ruszkiewicz. New York St. Martins Press, 1997. 236-242. Macklin, Ruth. Human Cloning? Dont Just Say No. U.S. News & World Report March 10, 1997 64. Nash, J. Madeline. The age of Cloning. Time March 17, 1997 62-72. Savage, David. 3 to 5 Year Ban on some(prenominal) Human Cloning Is Urged. The Los Angeles Times June 8, 1997. Shelley, Mary. Frankenstein. The Presence of Others. Eds. Andrea A. Lunsford, John J. Ruszkiewicz. New York St. Martins Press, 1997. 230-235. Stipp, David. The reliable Biotech Revolution. Fortune March 31, 1997 54. Cloning Madness Essays -- Science Genetics biology PapersCloning Madness Cloning, a topic that has recently caused mayhem all over the world, is possible, but will it be here to stay? The astonishing news that scientists had clon ed a sheep a couple of years ago sent people into panic at the thought that humans might be next. Cloning is a radical challenge to the most fundamental laws of biology, so its not unreasonable to be concerned that it might threaten human society and dignity (Macklin 64). Since most of the opposition is coming from the pure disgust of actually being able to clone species, it makes it difficult for people to get away from the emotional side of the issue and analyze the major implications cloning would have for society. To better understand this controversial issue, the pros and cons of cloning will be discussed. In Human Cloning? Dont Just Say No, Ruth Macklin states that while human cloning might not offer any benefits, no one has yet made a persuasive case that it would do any real harm either. Theologians contend that to clone a human would violate human dignity...But why suppose that cloned persons wouldnt share the same rights and dignity as the rest of us? ...Theres the fear... that parents might clone a child to have spare parts in case the original child needs an organ transplant. But parents of identical twins dont view one child as an organ farm for the other. Why should cloned childrens parents be any different? ...Even if human cloning offers no obvious benefits to society why ban it? (64) Macklin also states that in a democratic society we dont usually pass laws outlawing things before there is actual or probable evidence of harm. The same laws that now protect human rights should govern human cloning. A world not safe ... ... March 10, 1997 59-63. Kluger, Jeffrey. Will We Follow the Sheep? Time March 10, 1997 69-72. Kolata, Gina. Scientist Urge Senators Not to Rush to Ban Human Cloning. The New York Times March 13, 1997. Lewis, Thomas. The Hazards of Science. The Presence of Others. Eds. Andrea A. Lunsford, John J. Ruszkiewicz. New York St. Martins Press, 1997. 236-242. Macklin, Ruth. Human Cloning? Dont Just Say No. U.S. News & World Report March 10, 1997 64. Nash, J. Madeline. The Age of Cloning. Time March 17, 1997 62-72. Savage, David. 3 to 5 Year Ban on Any Human Cloning Is Urged. The Los Angeles Times June 8, 1997. Shelley, Mary. Frankenstein. The Presence of Others. Eds. Andrea A. Lunsford, John J. Ruszkiewicz. New York St. Martins Press, 1997. 230-235. Stipp, David. The Real Biotech Revolution. Fortune March 31, 1997 54.