Everyone hates cloning for some reasons. Individuals think cloning is disgusting, inhumane, repulsive, and out-of-place. Since the birth of Dolly the sheep, many organizations rejected the whole idea of cloning: human rights activists say cloning is against human rights, and Christians say it is against their Gods. What many are not seeing in human cloning are the benefits that cloning will bring to us: longer life spans on one hand and faster and more efficient medical cure on the other hand.
I, however, am one of the “everyone” mentioned above. Despite all the positive, promising future that cloning might bring to us, I am opposed to this genetic modification. It seems to be a dangerous and wild asexual reproduction in labs.
A scientist argued: “much of the research about human cloning is centered on the ability of stem cells to produce tissues to be used for medical treatment.”
Huh? Ability of what? Tissues for medical treatment?
That is how most of us feel, but the truth be told, the statement just means that eradication of prevalent medical difficulties such as cancer, Alzheimer’s disease, and Parkinson’ disease, can be possibly realized. Even though I am very against human cloning, I think this aspect of it is quite favorable. In fact, I was for human cloning when this was one of the few things I knew about human cloning. My lack of knowledge once sugarcoated human cloning.
What we cannot ignore are dangerous, as well as ugly, truths—the hidden facts of human cloning. Not only the ridiculous costs of reproductive cloning but also scant certainty is what we have to take a look at. According to a study done by Health Research Funding, only about one out of hundred attempts is successful. Even worse, this genetic modification cause unpredictable and undesirable outcomes. This is highly ironic; a step taken to wipe out undesirable human traits might actually bring short lives and high rates of tumor growth. Lower intelligence and high rates of infects are yet another risks that we all have to take.
The other side of the spectrum of trouble is human rights.
To what degrees are they humans and to what degrees are they only the brainchildren of the scientists?
Even the most objective research programs and organizations like AMA (American Medical Association), The Center of Bioethics and Human Dignity, and AAAS (American Association for the Advancement of Science) argue that “human stem cell research requiring the destruction of human embryo is objectionable on legal, ethical, and scientific ground.
If human cloning is legalized, many “humans” will be unfairly treated, and be exposed to many violations against their “human” rights. It is now a trite argument against human cloning, but it will degrade the overall values of humans; more optimal human clones will be more worthy, while the second-rate clones will be less valued. It is true that the outcome of human cloning is unpredictable—who knows if we will end up treating every humans and every clones fairly and with respect? Be that as it may, judging from the purposes that human cloning are used for, I believe equal and same respect to both humans and their clones seem almost impossible.
While more than ninety-five percent of the attempts to clone mammals have miserably failed, and while human cloning is both directly and indirectly violating human rights and dignity, is cloning still worth the risk? Will the overall benefits of this asexual reproduction in science labs outweigh all the negatives? I believe this asexual reproduction does not meet safety standards and is not yet an option that us human can perfectly and ideally rely on. (605)
Your best argument was pointing out the irony.