Society’s Concerns On Human Cloning
Human cloning can be defined as the process through which Reproductive cells of human being such as embryo are cloned to produce a person who is a copy of the same cell in a genetically way. Several attempts have been carried out on human embryo cloning but failed until 2013 when the first case of human embryo cloning was successful. Human cloning was opposed by many groups of people due to risks associated to it, for example could affect a woman who may produce so many eggs and insecure as it could lead to impersonification according to (Larijani and Farzaneh, 86). According to specialists in the scientific field, this process is Insafe to the children that are cloned as it causes a psychological threat. On the ethical and religious perspective, clonic is against ethical laws and religious faith of religious organizations like Christians.
It is believed that cloning began in 1901 to treat hereditary diseases in animals and breeding. Through the invention of genetic engineering in animals, it led to the production of animals with high resistance to diseases according to Haran. It began with a salamander whose embryo cells were successfully transferred to its nuclear cells. The process continued and it was applied in different animals such as tadpole to produce frog, sheep and cows. Animal cloning was carried out in different states such a Scotland where a sheep called Dolly was cloned using cells of a mature sheep mammary glands, In the United States of America and also in Iran. Research on human cloning went on until January 2008 when Dr French argued that he had successfully created embryos of the human embryo but it failed. Later in 2019, primates cloning was carried out and there was a successful birth of two female clones.
Different states raised conflicting view about cloning, for example, it was viewed as insecure, unreligious and unethical by countries which oppose it while the supporting countries they view it as a way of human retrieval from deaths and genetic diseases. Human reproduction Clonic has advantages such as treating infertility, increase population in case of a calamity, transplanting of human organs such as the heart which can be replaced in case of a failure, replacing original man in case of a misfortune. As a result of these advantages, the Doctors suggest that states should allow human cloning. Moreover, there are disadvantages of human cloning and which include contracting of viral diseases, increase deaths due to genetic disorganization which are prone to animals. Christians and Muslim argue that procreation it is the work of the creator and thus human cloning is against the religious beliefs.
Finally, cloning began with animals and later advances where several attempts to clonic human embryo failed but researches are on progress. States, scientists and religious groups have opposed human cloning as they feel that it is insecure to human beings while others feel that it has a positive effect on the human being.
Two Views on Human Cloning
Proponents of human cloning argue that human cloning retains human dignity and uniqueness while opponents state that It does not retain human dignity and uniqueness, opponents continue and says that in a greater way it violates human creation process and hence it lowers human dignity, on the other side proponents, claim that individuality has no connection with DNA and thus it should be allowed. There is some misconception which has come out for and against the adoption of human cloning. Those misbeliefs are appeal to ignorance and slippery slope fallacy.in future, if human cloning will be possible, then personal identity and social family definition should not be threatened. Opponents bring out a different idea and state that the dignity of the family will go down if cloning will be allowed in society. Organizations such as humans’ rights and the UNESCO Universal Declaration on the human genome forbid activities that are not in line with human dignity. World health organization WHO attests that morally, human cloning is unacceptable to human integrity and dignity. Finally, Bimbacher claims that Human reproduction cloning contributes to misuse of resources such as medicine and biology (54). proponents argue that human dignity could be promoted by human cloning as it provides the accuracy of the generic determination. Continues by saying that human cloning is artificial and it is more important than natural reproduction. Therefore human dignity is not affected in any way by asexual reproduction
Fallacy revolving around human cloning is directed on some difficult question that can lead to deadlock. An example of such a question is; humans who are born through the natural process are stronger than those who are born through human cloning. People who ask this kind of question they believe that the character of the clone is different from the original person. The resultant creature in cloning is devalued because it takes place outside the womb and it became a counterfeit creature. Moreover, this kind of a creature compared to the real one, it lacks a mother and father through the natural way and hence its dignity is lowered. Supporters of cloning process they have different views when interpreting the meaning of human dignity. They base their Idea on autonomy and human uniqueness. They say that autonomy is close to human dignity.
Slippery slope fallacy is another fallacy which is committed mainly to the proponents of human clonic. They tend to draw a comparison between human clonic and in vitro fertilization (IVF) and other words donation of sperms. They have given example like if children born from IVF they are complete human beings, then it should apply to clonic reproductive. Human clonic should be considered when one of the partners is infertile. In other words, it can be applied when the production of children naturally fails. The proponents need to understand that couples who are fertile and lazy mothers who fear to carry pregnancies should not be allowed to use human clonic process. This discussion will help the opponent realize that human clonic will only be applicable where a remedy of a child is required.
Human clonic can be applied where treatment of incurable disease is required. Responding to ethical issues, we realize that human clonic came into place to solve the burden of genetic diseases. A concern was raised portraying impact which may emanate from human clonic, for example, it was to affect the defective genes and then later affect individuals’ phenotype. Human clonic resistance motions started to rise after the clonic of the sheep which was successful and many people were against it. The big question which was in the minds of many t was, what would the world be if clonic was allowed?
In the documentary, human clonic is viewed as an attempt where science is trying to compete with God in creating a fully developed mammal and religiously God is termed as the creator. Therefore, there is a fear that science is trying to violate this sacred role of God. In strengthening this idea, using the analogy of graphic designers and video editors, it makes use of dramatic music and sounds. The use of graphics and video assist in determine the importance and matters of concern which are deeply rooted in this topic. The videos and graphics they present to the audience the extent to which human clonic has gone. Ideas and pictures are demonstrated on the success of clonic in animals and which could be advanced to be used by on human beings.
In the video, pathos is used to create fear in the viewers. Fear is achieved through a clip which demonstrated Frankenstein’s monster which reappearance from death and gagged a person to death. Other frightening features on which have been used in the video to increase fear are the sentiments from the US president Bill Clinton, ethos is demonstrated severally when Bunning the funding of human clonic, this is used to show concerns and causes. Logos is used which demonstrates the death of cloned sheep dolly due to lung disease. Out of the death of dolly sheep, it shows that clonic is associated with immature deaths.
It has come out clearly that the proponents are suggesting the adoption of human clonic as it will help the parent to know how their children will help to improve their future population. This new population will be in a position to cope up with the new environmental changes. Opposers of human cloning state that this process will affect the autonomy and deprive children their freedom of choice for example in career choices. Scientists conclude that human clonic should be prohibited simply because it is an unsecure way as there are high chances of abnormal births.
.
In conclusion, human production cloning has been prohibited under the following grounds; preserve and protect human life and dignity. To the proponents, they should understand that humans being should not be created through cloning as this will lead to moral decay in society. Moreover, if human reproduction cloning is allowed, then it means that people have begun playing the role of God. To ensure that human reproduction clonic is not carried out, then there should be an established global body which will be centred on this topic.
Works Cited
Jensen, Eric. “The Dao of human cloning: utopian/dystopian hype in the British press and popular films.” Public Understanding of Science 17.2 (2008): 123-143.
Blackford, Russell. “Human cloning and ‘posthuman’ society.” Monash bioethics review 24.1 (2005): 10-26.