In today s society it seems as if anything can be accomplished through technology. Though most advancements are being made to help cure and care for sick and disabled people, many believe that scientist have gone to far and are playing the role of God. One of the most asked questions today is the theory of cloning a human being. Technology and science have practically made this idea a reality; however, many disagree about the ethics of cloning. Is cloning just another means of reproduction or is science disregarding the natural order of Gods creation.
In the final analysis, human cloning is wrong because of the negative effects it will have in today s society and the danger it will inflict on humans. When questions about human cloning arise, people are over flowed with ideas of how it could contribute or benefit themselves and their future. Would it allow them to live longer? Could it give hope to those unable to bare offspring naturally? Could it open window to human viruses, which would allow for medicines to treat incurable diseases, such as Aids and the Ebola Virus?
What could cloning actually do? Scientist plan to use cloning for medical purposes along for a simple means of reproduction. Researchers also intend to clone adult human cells that will make it possible to grow new hearts and livers and nerve cells (Gibbs 49). If this were so, then it would most likely be possible to alter the genetics of a person all together. Jeanna DuPrau states, Most of us would be happy if our parents had created us by a genetic inheritance free of cancer, heart disease, and progressive neurological disease (68-69).
Cloning could answer the questions to so many mysteries that plague scientist today. And with answers, cloning brings hope to those suffering from permanent illnesses, and would give rise to bigger and better communities. Over the past decade, more and more couples have found themselves impotent and unable to bear children naturally. Cloning could, for example; give hope to someone who is infertile because of cancer therapy [and] wants to have a baby through cloning (Gibbs 48).
This option would enable families to have children without having to go through the ctually birthing process. Yet these are still theories, cloning can still be used as a possible and major alternative for consideration. Though cloning van be basically created around the medical world; its purpose doesn t stop there. Society takes this idea in and creates a whole new genre of topics that they could benefit from. Cloning is thought to give rise to human betterment and in improving. Humanity should be in control of its own destiny, says DuPrau (74).
Consider being able to clone the most excellent specimens of humanity.. then the number of excellent people would increase, and in the long run, the human race would be improved (DuPrau 61). With this being true, people feel that their future of being successful is inevitable. They will be able to determine exactly what they want in their children and have them created to their every desire and liking. With the coming genetic revolution, we will be directing our own evolution rather than relying on a natural (and sometimes disastrous) lottery to do it for us, states Jonathan Colvin (2). With all the possibilities available, cloning is almost a predestined otion that is on the verge of becoming reality; however, there is much controversy on the subject of human cloning.
DePrau feels that some compromise has to be reached between those who say human cloning must never happen, because it is immoral, and those who say human cloning must happen because its benefits out weigh its dangers (75). Though there are many possible benefits, there are far more who disagree with the thought of human cloning and having technology produce future man-kind. If human cloning became possible, the social and economic standards pressed upon the people of our world would become unreachable.
To create a clone it will cost fewer than 1 million dollars ( DuPrau 62) This outrageous figure would be too astounding for anyone of normal income to afford. Due to this fact, differences between rich and poor could become so great that humans will literally be transformed into more than one species (DePrau 63). Therefore this capability will be limited to wealthy people and in this country wealthy people are likely to be white (62). With this being true, our world will once again be put into a type of segregation era were people are forced to be separated over something that they have no control over.
Population as a whole will become a game for technology and science to play with and it will eventually bring us down instead more advanced. We will become products of the same types and individuality will scarcely exist. Colvin states that.. .by eliminating the mixing of genes that occur during conventional reproduction, human biodiversity will be diminished and human evolution will cease (2). We would be diminishing the natural process of reproduction and by that decreasing our characteristics as different people. With a population such as this there comes certain expectations that are to be met.
Lives will start being created, as products instead of a conception of love between two people. Human beings should be created for their own sake, never for someone else’s purpose (DuPrau 70). Many times these children may be created just to satisfy the desire to relive a past time or to take the place of a lost loved one. What a burden for those children, to know that their parents were striving to re-create themselves or someone deceased (Arnst 1). That child will feel obligated to be a person he or she is not prepared to be or may not even want to be; however, he or she will be born with ertain expectations.
The child may feel these expectations as pressure. He night feel that he doesn t have the freedom to be what he wants to be (DuPrau 65). To create a child and press such expectations on him or her is all together unethical. A child should be brought into the world out of love and wedlock, not for ones own personal purpose or desire. If a the child is brought into the world for this purpose, imperfections and all, then the child is therefore always a gift-one like them who springs from their embrace, not being whom they have made and whose destiny they should determine (OConner 24).