Cloned Human example essay topic

Since March 1997, the birth of a cloned sheep, named Dolly, has caused a great sensation around the world. The reason why Dolly shocked the world was that she was the first clone from a cell of an adult mammal: something scientists thought to be impossible. The cloning of a mammal cell meant that the possibility of cloning a human beings was increased. For fear human cloning, a lot of countries have taken necessary measures to regulate the study of it. We should ban human cloning because it has the possibility to reduce the value of human life: taking away individuality in our society. Richard Seed, a physicist who supports human cloning, said in a radio interview that he would open a clinic of human cloning for infertile people and make a big profit (Hotwire d Japan).

If human cloning were allowed there would be so many people just like Seed who would use cloning technology to make money. The business of operating the technology looks so profitable because there could be 100,000 or so women in the U.S. who would like a similar chance to use cloning to have their own babies. Probably, they do not care how much money they pay to have their own blood-related babies. Allowing human cloning creates a world where one could get life with money. Buying life reduce the value of it because we do not respect things which we can get easily. It could lead to the increase of murder.

One day it might be possible that at a department Saavedra Page 2 store we can buy life that is labeled, 'ON SALE!' In the simplest language, cloning is the process in which the DNA from some cell of a body is put by electrical shock into a female egg cell whose DNA has been removed. Then the egg cell is implanted into a womb, then it grows as same as a natural baby does. The problem is that there is absolutely no reason why the egg cell be implanted into the same woman who offers DNA. Hence, it might be connected with abuses, such as a black market of egg cells or a company offering surrogate mothers. Many women suffering from anatomical complications that prohibit successful childbearing might try to find a suitable surrogate mother. Also, those women who just do not like the discomforts of pregnancy might use cloning technology.

In this point, human cloning is no longer developed for only infertile people but also for lazy women. As explained, cloning needs the DNA of only one person. Dr. Ian Wilmut in Roslin Institute, where Dolly was produced, claims that we should use the word 'copying' for reproduction of a human instead of 'cloning'. Human cloning would create duplication of humans, and the individuality of each person would be lost. Someone may oppose the idea saying that the environment in which a person grow largely contributes the formation of his personality, but his appearance would be completely the same as the original. Critics may contend that twins have the same appearance and are accepted as individuals.

However, making twins through cloning restricts the individuality artificially, not naturally. Natural and artificial are very different. I doubt whether a human conceived by cloning will be treated as same as the others. In a present school situation where bullying is an everyday occurrence, being a clone may be a factor of Saavedra Page 3 being bullied.

And it is possible that a cloned human would be dependent and inferior to the existence to the original. We would most likely think a clone is kind of a copy of the original rather than a twin of the original. Of course, there are advantages to develop cloning technology. Ian Wilmut demands that the study of it not to be banned, emphasizing the technology would be useful for the development of treatment for genetic diseases and of mass production of good cattle; which will be surely needed when the population increases. Yet, he opposes human cloning for moral reasons saying "Human cloning will make family system even worse than it is at the present". Cloning needs only one DNA, and it does not matter whether a man or a woman offers it, we can easily imagine that there will be much more single-parent families.

If a man wants to have a baby by himself he can offer his DNA to a surrogate mother. In other words, children conceived by cloning cannot have both blood-related father and mother. Even if it is okay for a parent, it is very hard for the cloned child. Religions believing that god is the creator of life would be badly damaged by human cloning. Mark D. Eibert, an attorney at law argues that religions should not be an excuse of banning things since all people in a country do not believe one specific religion.

However we should not ignore religions completely. There are some countries where one religion plays an important role. Suppose that human cloning would create a society where science technology controls everything even our birth. Cloning technology might allow us to choose which baby we have, a boy or a girl.

Technology will influence many things in so many fields. The religious believers would be left with no concept of Saavedra Page 4 reality because all that they believe in life would be contradicted. By permitting cloning of human, too many problems would occur. The research of human cloning will help infertility. But I attach more importance to the value of our lives, individuality, and bond of a family than curing a minor number of people. Eibert strongly insists that the government should not make cloning of human illegal.

He claimed that everyone has the right to have a child and it is a freedom that the government cannot infringe. I opposed this opinion; the government should intervene in this kind of dispute. Who else but the government can make scientists think calmly and tell them to stop improving the technology that has a possibility of breaking rules in our society. I insist that cloning of human should not be done.