There are a plethora of issues dealing with both human and animal cloning. The basis for both arguments is anthropogcentric; animal rights activists have long argued that animals, as living entities, possess the same inalienable rights as humans.
Cloning is still in its fledgling state scientifically. Much of the ethical issue in cloning humans stems from the uncertainty of the survival of the clone. Thomas Murray of the Hastings Center says, “it is absolutely inevitable that groups are going to try to clone a human being. But they are going to create a lot of dead and dying babies along the way.” The failure rate for animal cloning is 90%. Ethically, cloning is not a reliable enough technology to apply to humans or animals.
Many of the ethical issues against cloning originate from religion.
Philisophically, people argue harm and human dignity. Like mentined, damaged DNA and death are very prominent. This is how medical advances proceed and as much as some may be ignorant, we use millions of animals for research for most of the drugs and supplies on the market.
Cloning specific body parts would be a major breakthrough medically, saving many lives and relieving stress that it might otherwise induce. It would also avert the aging process.
Cloning an entire person would invoke the argument of human dignity and morality. From what I understand, the argument is whether or not a cloned human being is equal to us in human-ness.
Click here to cancel reply.
Sorry,At this time user registration is disabled. We will open registration soon!
Don't have an account? Click Here to Signup
© Copyright GreenAnswers.com LLC