Numerous moral issues arise when the topic of human cloning comes up. Some perceive human replication as a form of narcissism, while others view it as a saving grace (Colvin, pp.22). We are at a stalemate between ideologies. It can’t be denied that there remains to be many unanswered questions, including when and for what reasons human cloning should be considered.
Gregory Stock, author of “The Last Human”, likens the effects of drug use for performance enhancement in sports to the idea of genetically developing a child specifically designed to exceed at certain areas (Stock, pp. 230). This ‘unnatural’ biological enhancement is widely frowned upon and seen as unfair. ‘Playing God‘, as some call it, should be criminalized to prevent reoccurrence of a new eugenics movement, like during the Nazi era.
It is believed by some that if a person is able to clone themselves or choose the characteristics of their children then there will much less diversity and more discrimination in the world (Colvin, pp. 222). On the other hand evidence seems to support the theory that genetics (nature) and environment (nurture) work together, therefore diversity is inevitable regardless of a persons origin. In fact the copied individual may be just as unique as any other. Clones are theorized to be more like an identical twin with differing characteristics then a perfect clone (Colvin, pp.221). However opponents point out that perhaps this is just another stage of evolution as a unique species .
Regardless of whether the effects would be positive or negative, remaining at a standoff about cloning will not bring resolution. There are many areas that need to be fully understood before moving forward with human replication. The first step toward better understanding how cloning may effect society is to find stable ground about the controversial topic prior to giving the technology any ability to advance or harm the human species.
Colvin, Jonathan. “Me My Clone and I.” Goshgarian, Gary. What Matters in America. Stock. New York: Pearson Longman, 2007. 220-223.
Stock, Gregory. “The Last Human.” Goshgarian, Gary. What Matters in America. Stock. New York: Pearson Longman, 2007. 228-232.
Gregory Stock, author of “The Last Human”, likens the effects of drug use for performance enhancement in sports to the idea of genetically developing a child specifically designed to exceed at certain areas (Stock, pp. 230). This ‘unnatural’ biological enhancement is widely frowned upon and seen as unfair. ‘Playing God‘, as some call it, should be criminalized to prevent reoccurrence of a new eugenics movement, like during the Nazi era.
It is believed by some that if a person is able to clone themselves or choose the characteristics of their children then there will much less diversity and more discrimination in the world (Colvin, pp. 222). On the other hand evidence seems to support the theory that genetics (nature) and environment (nurture) work together, therefore diversity is inevitable regardless of a persons origin. In fact the copied individual may be just as unique as any other. Clones are theorized to be more like an identical twin with differing characteristics then a perfect clone (Colvin, pp.221). However opponents point out that perhaps this is just another stage of evolution as a unique species .
Regardless of whether the effects would be positive or negative, remaining at a standoff about cloning will not bring resolution. There are many areas that need to be fully understood before moving forward with human replication. The first step toward better understanding how cloning may effect society is to find stable ground about the controversial topic prior to giving the technology any ability to advance or harm the human species.
Colvin, Jonathan. “Me My Clone and I.” Goshgarian, Gary. What Matters in America. Stock. New York: Pearson Longman, 2007. 220-223.
Stock, Gregory. “The Last Human.” Goshgarian, Gary. What Matters in America. Stock. New York: Pearson Longman, 2007. 228-232.
No comments:
Post a Comment