Essay by PaperNerd ContributorCollege, Undergraduate February 2002

download word file, 5 pages 0.0

Downloaded 13 times

Are people now days so self absorbed that they would like to see their selves duplicated? The fact of the matter in regards to human cloning is that we are playing with a human life. There are enough facts available to support the ban on human cloning. Cloning is much in the news and is a very heartening subject. Cloning raises many issues such as the child's welfare, the result in malformed babies as well as religious issues.

In the beginning stages of human cloning, the child or children would become exploited and become media objects. According to Justin Berley and John Harris, "The cloned children would be harmed by the fearful or prejudicial attitude people may have about or toward them" (McGee). Louise Brown, the first test tube baby is still in the media today, even twenty years after conception. The cloned would constantly be compared to the donor and might feel as if they're "living a life in the shadow," especially since the media would be watching and continually comparing the cloned with the donor.

"To create a human clone based on the experience of cloning one sheep from adult cell DNA would be blatantly immoral. The clone could be born deformed, dying, or prematurely aging" (McGee). There would be no basis for taking such risk unless there was some overwhelmingly powerful reason to clone someone, especially in the early stages of human cloning. Safety alone justifies moral concern. How could scientists want to start putting human lives in danger based on one successful experience of animal cloning out of hundreds of unsuccessful experiments? It took scientists 277 tries when they were cloning Dolly before they got a healthy lamb.

Cloning humans would be a lot more complicated. Even the "successful" Dolly clone has abnormalities. In a result...