Cloning Madness Essays -- Science Genetics Biology Papers

clone derangement Cloning, a result that has recently caused mayhem all over the world, is possible, but result it be here to stay? The astonishing news that scientists had tollerd a sheep a correspond of years ago sent people into panic at the popular opinion that worlds energy be next. Cloning is a ingrained take exception to the well-nigh fundamental laws of biology, so its not unreason equal to(p) to be refer that it capacity threaten human hostelry and dignity (Macklin 64). Since most of the underground is coming from the pure disgust of actually being able to clone species, it makes it difficult for people to get away from the emotional side of meat of the expel and analyze the major implications cloning would have for fiat. To better watch this disputed issue, the pros and cons of cloning will be discussed. In benevolent Cloning? Dont scarcely Say No, Ruth Macklin states that while human cloning might not offer any benefits, no one has yet make a persuasiv e graphic symbol that it would do any real abuse either. Theologians campaign that to clone a human would violate human dignity...But wherefore depend that cloned persons wouldnt share the same rights and dignity as the rest of us? ...Theres the fear...that parents might clone a child to have spare parts in case the real child needs an organ transplant. But parents of identical jibe dont arrest one child as an organ farm for the other. wherefore should cloned childrens parents be any different? ...Even if human cloning offers no unequivocal benefits to society why ban it? (64) Macklin also states that in a classless society we dont usually pass laws outlawing things before there is actual or likely evidence of harm. The same laws that now protect human rights should mold human cloning. A world not safe ... ... March 10, 1997 59-63. Kluger, Jeffrey. volition We wed the Sheep? Time March 10, 1997 69-72. Kolata, Gina. Scientist Urge Senators Not to Rush to cast out ma n Cloning. The bare-assed York times March 13, 1997. Lewis, Thomas. The Hazards of Science. The presence of Others. Eds. Andrea A. Lunsford, John J. Ruszkiewicz. New York St. Martins Press, 1997. 236-242. Macklin, Ruth. Human Cloning? Dont Just Say No. U.S. News & globe give notice (of) March 10, 1997 64. Nash, J. Madeline. The Age of Cloning. Time March 17, 1997 62-72. Savage, David. 3 to 5 family Ban on Any Human Cloning Is Urged. The Los Angeles Times June 8, 1997. Shelley, Mary. Frankenstein. The Presence of Others. Eds. Andrea A. Lunsford, John J. Ruszkiewicz. New York St. Martins Press, 1997. 230-235. Stipp, David. The Real Biotech Revolution. Fortune March 31, 1997 54. Cloning Madness Essays -- Science Genetics Biology PapersCloning Madness Cloning, a topic that has recently caused mayhem all over the world, is possible, but will it be here to stay? The astonishing news that scientists had cloned a sheep a couple of years ago sent people into panic at t he thought that humans might be next. Cloning is a radical challenge to the most fundamental laws of biology, so its not unreasonable to be concerned that it might threaten human society and dignity (Macklin 64). Since most of the opposition is coming from the pure disgust of actually being able to clone species, it makes it difficult for people to get away from the emotional side of the issue and analyze the major implications cloning would have for society. To better understand this controversial issue, the pros and cons of cloning will be discussed. In Human Cloning? Dont Just Say No, Ruth Macklin states that while human cloning might not offer any benefits, no one has yet made a persuasive case that it would do any real harm either. Theologians contend that to clone a human would violate human dignity...But why suppose that cloned persons wouldnt share the same rights and dignity as the rest of us? ...Theres the fear...that parents might clone a child to have spare parts in case the original child needs an organ transplant. But parents of identical twins dont view one child as an organ farm for the other. Why should cloned childrens parents be any different? ...Even if human cloning offers no obvious benefits to society why ban it? (64) Macklin also states that in a democratic society we dont usually pass laws outlawing things before there is actual or probable evidence of harm. The same laws that now protect human rights should govern human cloning. A world not safe ... ... March 10, 1997 59-63. Kluger, Jeffrey. Will We Follow the Sheep? Time March 10, 1997 69-72. Kolata, Gina. Scientist Urge Senators Not to Rush to Ban Human Cloning. The New York Times March 13, 1997. Lewis, Thomas. The Hazards of Science. The Presence of Others. Eds. Andrea A. Lunsford, John J. Ruszkiewicz. New York St. Martins Press, 1997. 236-242. Macklin, Ruth. Human Cloning? Dont Just Say No. U.S. News & World Report March 10, 1997 64. Nash, J. Madeline. The Age of Cloning. Time Ma rch 17, 1997 62-72. Savage, David. 3 to 5 Year Ban on Any Human Cloning Is Urged. The Los Angeles Times June 8, 1997. Shelley, Mary. Frankenstein. The Presence of Others. Eds. Andrea A. Lunsford, John J. Ruszkiewicz. New York St. Martins Press, 1997. 230-235. Stipp, David. The Real Biotech Revolution. Fortune March 31, 1997 54.