The Pros And Cons Of Clone Present: Is It Worth The Risk?

by Ben

---

Posted on 11-08-2020 02:07 AM

---

---

With so much enhancement in medical science, cloning is slowly but surely looking like it could be in our near future. However, is it really an option that should be considered as a way to extend human life? find out the pros and cons, and decide for yourself if cloning is worth the risks. Take an introduction to biology with an online class.

Post comments: 0 comments image source: ipscell. Com cloning is an emerging technology where an identical person with your own memories and thoughts is created. Just like the identical twins who have a slightly different appearance, a clone can be created which may have a different personality from the original person. To help you determine whether cloning is worthy of the risks, look at the following pros and cons.

An argumentative paper on the ethics and benefits of human cloning. This paper discusses the history, background and the complicated ethics regarding human cloning. The author looks at the science of cloning, pros and cons of cloning and argues that cloning is beneficial in the long run. “there is no other topic in health care with more potential for controversy than human cloning. I decided to write my paper on human cloning for this very reason, it will be an even more controversial issue than abortion in the future for my generation. Indeed, cloning is a topic for the future but this future is much closer than many people would like to believe. Many have deep religious and ethical reasons for wanting a total ban on human cloning. However, there are also many people, including some scientists, who believe that the possible benefits of human cloning outweigh the risks by a huge margin. Cloning has become an issue within the past 4 years due to the realization that it is possible to clone gift clone mug gift clone a human being. ”.

Advantages & Disadvantages of Cloning

The process of extracting stem cells from the embryo during therapeutic cloning results in the destruction of the embryo being used. This is the main reason why many views are against stem cell research as they believe killing an embryo is equivalent to killing a human being. However, some people believe that equalising a cluster of cells with a human is completely wrong and advantages of therapeutic cloning with regards to treatment of many diseases outweigh the disadvantages of it (explorestemcells, 2010).

Plants are propagated either sexually through pollinated seed or asexually by cloning the plant with cuttings, layering or from offsets. Some plants are only propagated asexually because they don't produce viable seed, while other plants are grown from both seeds and cuttings or offsets. Understanding the benefits and disadvantages of asexual plant propagation helps you may an educated choice when looking to expand the garden.

One advantage of cloning is the fact that we will be able to meet the demands of organ transplants; many more people are needing transplants each year, and we will be able to meet these demands by cloning healthy organs when and if we need them. As well as this, we will be able to figure out how and why genetic disorders develop, and if age has any bearing, by studying the embryos and a growing funny gift clone clone coffee mugs clone gift closely. Also, it could help to preserve endangered species, which is good as we don't want any more species to become extinct. However, there are also disadvantages to cloning. For one thing, clones may not live as long, for example dolly the sheep only lived for half as long as normal sheep do. As well as this, the cloning process often fails and is expensive to carry out; it took 300 attempts to gift clone coffee mug clone clone mug dolly so it would've cost thousands to keep trying to clone her. Another disadvantage is the fact that people see this a playing god and messing with nature, which they see as a bad thing that is unnatural and shouldn't be done.

The Pros of Cloning

Reproductive cloning has a number of pros. Much of it relates to helping human families gain children, but there is also a benefit for the animal world. Take an online course in gcse biology. Here’s a brief list of the ways reproductive cloning can help: parents with no eggs and sperm can create children that are genetically related.

While we as a council acknowledge merit in some of the arguments made for cloning-to-produce-children, we are generally not persuaded by them. The fundamental weakness of the proponents' case is found in their incomplete view of human procreation and families, and especially the place and well-being of children. Proponents of cloning tend to see procreation primarily as the free exercise of a parental right, namely, a right to satisfy parental desires for self-fulfillment or a right to have a child who is healthy or "superior. " parents seek to overcome obstacles to reproduction, to keep their children free of genetic disease or disorder, and to provide them with the best possible genetic endowment. The principles guiding such prospective parents are freedom (for themselves), control (over their child), and well-being (both for themselves and what they imagine is best for their child). Even taken together, these principles provide at best only a partial understanding of the meaning and entailments of human procreation and child-rearing. In practice, they may prove to undermine the very goods that the proponents of cloning aim to serve, by undermining the unconditional acceptance of one's offspring that is so central to parenthood.

The pros or advantages of human cloning include: infertility: infertile people or same-sex couples could have children made from cloned cells. Organ replacement: a clone, like in the movie, "the island," could be a source for transplant organs or tissue. (there are ethical issues that arise from this, however. )genetic research: cell cloning could assist scientists in gene editing and research.

In order to address the ethics of human cloning itself, we need to understand why people would want to do it in the first place. People often respond to the prospect of human cloning in two ways. They are squeamish about the idea—a squeamishness leon kass has argued we should take very seriously. They also find something alluring about the idea. Such fascination is captured in a variety of films, including "the boys from brazil" (portraying the attempt to clone adolf hitler), "bladerunner" (questioning whether a clone would be more like a person or a machine), and "multiplicity" (presenting a man's attempt to have enough time for his family, job, and other pursuits by producing several live adult replicas of himself). Popular discussions center on the wonderful prospects of creating multiple mother teresas, michael jordans, or other notable figures.

Basically, therapeutic cloning is being practiced to replicate cells and tissues that have the qualities to be used for particular medical purposes. It is believed to become the future of medical science, only if research allows it to continue. As you can see, it is a method of cloning that has become a widely controversial issue because of the ethics the process would involve, as well as the fact that it is seen literally by many people as a life and death issue. In order for us to form a good opinion on the subject, it is important to learn about its pros and cons.

Human cloning is possible but unlawful in most countries. We discuss the pros and cons of genetic engineering and cloning, and whether it should be legal. This is your opportunity to convince other people to support or oppose to human cloning. Leave your comments below.

Many science fiction movies, such as gattaca, the island or moon have dealt with the implications of genetic engineering and human cloning. Most of them have portrayed a somewhat dystopian future and emphasize the problems of genetic manipulation. However, it is also important to stress the potential benefits of human cloning. Here is a list of its pros:.

The Cons of Cloning

There is a constant debate in the world of science between two different perspectives. One side believes that knowledge is value-free: that no specific knowledge is “good” or “evil. ” the other believes that some knowledge has inherent morality — that knowledge itself can be good or bad. Today, we’re diving into one such controversy in science: the debate over the ethics of cloning. It’s a big subject that can stir up vehement emotions, but many people don’t understand the issue. Let’s clarify.

Social scientific easy business. Requires careful work, constant checking preliminary findings, skepticism accomplishments. Findings report opposition little better, quotes respondents readily transformed into questionnaire items studies deeply. Projects wish variations attitudes distinctions following: animals versus versus whole versus wider versus versus full organisms attitudes versus actions, feeling versus prohibiting future, relatively reliable technology, well-accepted industry biological products transplantation. Time, poorly worked out, methods been successful animals unsuited beings. Thus, quite reasonable predict face difficult period technical development, deformed, short-lived, suffering increased impatience. Thus, thoughtful advocate caution, employ figurative language express well-grounded concerns. Dogmatic opposition rooted technical humanitarian concerns, existence incompatible scientific progress. Peaceful opposition, short converting believers away strongly-held, literalistic faith. Must therefore anticipate period overt conflict between secular advocates opponents opponents succeed establishing strict anti-cloning laws world-wide, then conflict harsh (and unfortunate) possibility violence. Those violates god's laws unlikely show tolerance defy supposedly sacred prohibition.

Cloning could prove helpful in the research of genetics. Using cloning technologies, genetic researchers would have a better understanding of the composition of genes and the effects of genetic constituents on human traits. There is also the likely ability to alter genetic constituents in cloned humans, and cloning could help combat genetic diseases. Discover a mathematical way to observe biology with an online course.

Cloning and subcloning are two techniques of molecular biology to manipulate genomes. Both of these are important to introduce a dna fragment of interest into the genome of an organism. Moreover, they are important in the construction of genome libraries as well. Also, both methods rely on restriction digestion and pcr.

Cloning is a technique in molecular biology that helps to introduce a dna fragment of interest into a host organism or to construct dna libraries while subcloning is another technique in molecular biology that helps to introduce a dna fragment from a parent vector into another vector as well. Therefore, this is the main difference between cloning and subcloning.

Selective human traits: after editing or removing bad genes, cloning could lead engineered humans for specific traits. Human development: cloning could enhance and advance human development. The cons or disadvantages of human cloning raise moral, ethical and safety issues: reproductive cloning: the negatives of human cloning including the making of designer babies. Human cloning: could be a violation of the clone's individual human rights.

Genetic Engineering and Cloning

Ethicists joined the discussion after john lederberg, a nobel laureate for physiology or medicine, advocated in a 1966 article cloning and genetic engineering as appropriate means to improve the human race. 4 two protestant theologians were among the first to react – paul ramsey and joseph fletcher. Ramsey condemned cloning and adjacent genetic alterations, because he saw that they threaten christian views on human happiness, morality, personhood, power and procreation. They make happiness seem as an individual experience, although we should define it as a good moral life in a loving family. They turn morality into individual-centred calculations, although it should be a social enterprise. They see personhood as disembodied and abstract, although it is embodied and sexual. They regard power primarily as a struggle against natural forces, although it is one group’s dominance over others. And they reduce procreation to reproduction by perceiving children as projects and products instead of gifts. 5.

Diversity in all species of animals is a key to evolution on earth. Genetically engineering our species will have a detrimental effect on our genetic diversity- as in something like cloning would. Doesn’t the future generation deserve to see the diversity on earth as we did?.

Fletcher took the diametrically opposite view to ramsey’s, and argued that humankind would be better off replacing the clumsy traditional way of making babies and the ensuing genetic roulette by well controlled cloning and genetic engineering. Happiness consists of the preference satisfaction of individuals; and the individual’s freedom to do what one wishes is paramount. We should only curtail freedom if others would, without restrictions, come to harm’s way. Persons are rational beings who can choose and control their environment by their choices; and our moral aim is to maximize our personal well-being and the well-being of others. Parenting is a social, not a biological activity; and power over nature, including our own reproduction, is science’s gift to us. 6.

Human cloning refers to the creation of replicas or identical copies of human through genetic engineering techniques. Human cloning was a popular theme in science fiction literature but technological progress has made possible the clonation of species. Scientists have already managed to successfully clone plants and animals and in theory using similar technologies they could also create copies of humans. There are two processes through which humans could be in theory cloned:.

Recombinant dna technology is important for learning about other related technologies, such as gene therapy, genetic engineering of organisms, and sequencing genomes. Gene therapy can be used to treat certain genetic conditions by introducing virus vectors that carry corrected copies of faulty genes into the cells of a host organism. Genes from different organisms that improve taste and nutritional value or provide resistance to particular types of disease can be used to genetically engineer food crops. With genome sequencing, fragments of chromosomal dna must be inserted into different cloning vectors to generate fragments of an appropriate size for sequencing.

How human cloning will work how cells work which came first, the chicken or the egg? what are genetically modified foods? what are stem cells and what are they used for? what is a gene, and what is genetic engineering? how can two children from the same parents look so different? how can there be seedless grapes? how can they reproduce?.

Gene cloning involves the production in vitro of new dna molecules which contain novel combinations of genes or oligonucleotides and the propagation of such recombinant dna molecules by the exploitation in vivo of the replicative mechanisms of bacteria (section 18. 3) and other organisms. The developments of genetic engineering techniques have permitted the alteration of the genome of microorganisms so that it produces substances of little intrinsic value but of great medical or economic value to mankind.

Moral and Ethical Arguments of Cloning

Benefits of cloning include being able to create tissue and organs that doctors can use when needed for surgery on the original. If labs can clone and grow only the parts needed, this would eliminate the moral and ethical issues associated with cloning an entire person. Other benefits include growing stem cells, cloning lab mice genetically engineered for the specific study, bringing back extinct species, reproducing a pet that died and cloning livestock for food.

The actual arguments against human cloning are extremely varied, and i cannot elaborate them all here. (i go into more of them, and in far more depth, in my 2014 book, humanity enhanced: genetic choice and the challenge for liberal democracies ). One common claim is that bringing children into the world in this way is somehow a violation of the natural order, or of human dignity; or perhaps it would be an act of “playing god”. Unfortunately, it can be very difficult to pin down precisely what any of these claims really mean in the context of bioethical debate. I am, for example, sceptical about the existence of anything that can correctly be called “human dignity”.

The moral and ethical arguments of cloning mostly refer to human cloning and human reproductive cloning. One of the problems of creating a cloned copy of a human being is that it creates a moral and ethical dilemma. Since the original and the copy are both human beings, but separate, like identical twins (nature's version of cloning), this means that the clone has the same rights as the original and it would be illegal to use the clone's parts or organs for replacement in the original. Some researchers argue that the cloning a child using the genetic material of the donor imposes an unfair situation upon the clone, as the clone has lost the right to have its own genetic material because the original forced its genes onto the clone.

Two decades later, i’m not sure that the ethical arguments advanced for and against human cloning are greatly different from those we saw back 1997. However, the early debate was very one-sided. The initial response to the dramatic nature article by wilmut et al. Was largely one of fear, mingled with disgust, with too little rational reflection. Since then, the fear-mongering has partly died down, but not before a great deal of draconian legislation was enacted across the world. Little chance was given for calmer voices - or any dissenting voices - to be heard before governments took action.

In 1952, the first successful animal cloning took place when robert briggs and thomas j. King cloned a tadpole. After almost four decades, the first cloned mammal, a sheep named dolly, was born in 1996. Following the creation of dolly, scientists started to think about developing human clones. However, scepticism and hesitation began to grow among scientists when dolly died at the age of six in 2003. This event, combined with the religious community’s disapproval of human cloning, resulted in the enactment of the human cloning prohibition act of 2009. According to this law, human cloning is unethical, immoral, and unlawful; hence, it is illegal. Today, human cloning is banned in 23 countries. Nevertheless, pro-cloning scientists and researchers are seeking to legalise human cloning in order to progress research and achieve more in this field (naik, 2010).

Animal cloning is the process of creating an exact duplicate of a certain animal. This mean the two animals would have precisely the same dna. Advancements in medical and science technology has made this amazing feat possible. The very first successful animal to be cloned was dolly. She was a sheep who was made by the process of nuclear transfer from another adult sheep. This science fiction like world has opened up possibilities for all sorts of things, including human cloning, organ harvesting, and even bringing back extinct species. It has sparked heated ethical and moral debates all over the world. Should we really be cloning animals?.

With regard to reproductive cloning, since creating an individual using scnt technology is a process of replication and not reproduction, some believe that this is not natural and completely disregards human dignity. However, this might be a kind of eluding technique that especially political systems would use nowadays in order to avoid the controversial arguments that surround an issue, such as human cloning. It is always easier to justify a banning policy by claiming that a particular law is issued due to breaching human dignity moralities rather than basing it on religious views (caulfield, 2003).

The Pros & Cons of Cloning

The prospect of cloning humans is highly controversial, and it raises a number of ethical, legal, and social challenges that need to be considered. The vast majority of scientists and lawmakers view human reproductive cloning—cloning for the purpose of making a human baby—immoral. Supporters see it as a possible solution to infertility problems. Some even imagine making clones of geniuses, whose work could advance society. Far-fetched views describe farms filled with clones whose organs are harvested for transplantation—a truly horrific idea.

Human procreation is not the only context for evaluating the prospect of human cloning. As a product of biotechnology, a potential means of assisted reproduction, and a possible source of cloned embryos for research and medical use, human cloning also points us to questions about the aims, ends, and means of biomedical science and technology. Ordinarily, we are not prompted to much reflection about what science is for and what goals technology should serve. Our society tacitly accepts the self-directing and self-augmenting character of these activities, and the vast majority of us support them because we esteem and benefit from their contributions to human understanding and human welfare. However, when developments such as cloning raise profound questions affecting fundamental moral values and social institutions, we are forced to consider the ends and means of science and technology, and to explore their standing in the scheme of human goods.

By editor in chief there are several different processes available right now that offer animal cloning as a possibility. In some species, cloning occurs naturally because of asexual reproduction. Identical twins are sometimes referred to as clones, though this is technically inaccurate because their dna is different. With artificial cloning, we can clone for genetic purposes, therapeutic purposes, or reproductive purposes. Most animal cloning pros and cons refer only to the reproductive process, where an animal which is a genetic duplicate of its parent is produced.

What are Some Benefits of Cloning?

Share: there will be plenty of occasions when we need to copy and recreate the hard drive. However, efficiently always remains a concern for all of us. Data loss and poor copying have always been subject for debate for the copy of hard disk. The best alternative for it is the cloning of the hard drive instead of the copying. There are many differences between copying and cloning. The major difference is that in cloning one copies sector by sector data. There are lot of benefits of that but the most important thing is to do it. It is not possible to do it in the normal windows. However, with the new easeus disk copy, you can achieve lot more than just cloning as well.

Many readers have asked variants on this question. In the weeks to come, we plan to run several responses that will indicate the variety of viewpoints in the scientific community about cloning's ultimate potential to provide concrete medical benefits. This reply comes from james robl in the department of veterinary and animal sciences of the university of massachusetts at amherst:.

Human cloning is not as simple as just replicating a person. There are various scientific and technological obstacles to performing this study. In terms of science, human cloning has its own benefits and problems, especially therapeutic cloning. One of the main advantages of using stem cells isolated from embryos is that the cells are pluripotent. This means that these cells are able to differentiate into any cell type in the human body except embryo cells. Hence, pluripotent cells have the potential to grow and produce healthy organs or to treat any body organ (tissue) diseases by replacing defective cells; for instance, this could involve using pluripotent cells to replace abnormal red blood cells in sickle-celled anaemia disease or to replace damaged heart tissue, thereby preventing cardiovascular diseases (explorestemcells, 2010).

"cloning is typically thought of as the production of genetically identical individuals. The primary biomedical benefits of cloning stem more from the use of this technology in the genetic modification of animals rather than from making identical copies, however. The idea behind the cloning technique is that each of the cells in an individual contains the same set of genes and, under the right conditions, should be capable of directing the development of a new genetically identical copy of the original animal.

When talking about a subject as controversial as animal cloning and transgenic animals, it’s important to evaluate its advantages and benefits, as well as the possible risks. That way, we can maintain a more rational and balanced perspective on such a relevant topic.

Irontoenail june 12, 2014 @mor - i'm hoping that the benefits of cloning will be tempered with wisdom and that we won't get to the point where we try to manipulate intelligence, or do things like cloning specific people. Because i think, if nothing else, we will quickly see that it's not as easy as science fiction makes it look. People are made up of more than just genetics. They are made up of experiences. And cloning has nothing to do with that.

By tfw experts | jun 13, 2019 | future , robots | 0 comments of all the questionable scientific practices out there, some are more controversial than others, and cloning dinosaurs is amongst them. Most of these practices are controversial because there is a good argument to be made on each side. While these technologies could provide massive benefits, they also constitute a big threat.

What Are the Advantages of Cloning?

There are some ways by which human cloning can benefit the humankind. Here is a list of advantages.

~ cloning does have its share of advantages. ~ it helps homosexual and sterile couples to have biological offspring. ~ it also helps in in-depth research, like motor neuron disease. ~ embryonic stem cells can be cloned to produce tissues or organs to replace or repair the damaged ones. ~ human cloning could allow parents who have lost a child a chance to redress their loss using the dna of their deceased child.

Ethos/pathos/logos advantages of cloning there are many advantages to cloning that can greatly affect our society today, for the future, and in the future. We can clone just about anything and here are some of the reasons why we should and why it is beneficial. One way we can use cloning for the better is by cloning transgenic animals.

The First Cloned Animal: Dolly the Sheep

1. The science of cloning is unsuccessful a majority of the time. Despite the numerous success stories of reproductive animal cloning that began with dolly the sheep, 95% of cloning attempts end in failure. Many failed attempts require extensive veterinarian interventions to provide a measure of comfort to the affected animal. Cloning often results in a higher risk of birth defects, impairments, or susceptibility to illness. Even cloned animals that appear healthy have developed unexpected health issues.

The first successful animal cloning occurred over 22 years ago, after a scottish blackface sheep surrogate mother gave birth to dolly on july 5, 1996, at the roslin institute, part of the university of edinburgh. Cloned from a six-year-old dorset sheep, scientists analyzed her dna at her first birthday and discovered that the telomeres at the end of her dna strands (think eraser on a pencil head) were shorter that they should be for her age. As animals and humans age, these telomeres become shorter. The average age for sheep runs between six to 12 years. Dolly died when she was six, and though she had shortened telomeres, she lived an average life and produced multiple offspring through natural methods, but she also developed diseases in her later years.

Reproductive cloning may enable researchers to make copies of animals with the potential benefits for the fields of medicine and agriculture. For instance, the same scottish researchers who cloned dolly have cloned other sheep that have been genetically modified to produce milk that contains a human protein essential for blood clotting. The hope is that someday this protein can be purified from the milk and given to humans whose blood does not clot properly. Another possible use of cloned animals is for testing new drugs and treatment strategies. The great advantage of using cloned animals for drug testing is that they are all genetically identical, which means their responses to the drugs should be uniform rather than variable as seen in animals with different genetic make-ups.

Dolly, the world’s most famous and controversial sheep , was born twenty years ago – on july 5, 1996 to be precise. She was the first mammal to enter the world following a process of reproductive cloning, making the event a spectacular scientific breakthrough. To create dolly, researchers at the roslin institute in scotland employed a technique known as somatic cell nuclear transfer (scnt). With scnt, dna from the nucleus of an ordinary cell - obtained from anywhere in an animal’s body - is transferred into an enucleated oocyte (egg cell), typically from a different animal.

Reproductive cloning is a very inefficient technique and most cloned animal embryos cannot develop into healthy individuals. For instance, dolly was the only clone to be born live out of a total of 277 cloned embryos. This very low efficiency, combined with safety concerns, presents a serious obstacle to the application of reproductive cloning.

In dolly’s case, her dna came from one sheep’s mammary cell; it was implanted into an egg from another sheep; and the resulting tiny biological entity was implanted into the uterus of yet a third sheep, where it grew until birth. The result of scnt is a creature with almost the same genetic potential as the one providing the nuclear dna. Scnt is thus a powerful, and often effective, form of animal cloning.

Researchers have observed some adverse health effects in sheep and other mammals that have been cloned. These include an increase in birth size and a variety of defects in vital organs, such as the liver, brain and heart. Other consequences include premature aging and problems with the immune system. Another potential problem centers on the relative age of the cloned cell's chromosomes. As cells go through their normal rounds of division, the tips of the chromosomes, called telomeres, shrink. Over time, the telomeres become so short that the cell can no longer divide and, consequently, the cell dies. This is part of the natural aging process that seems to happen in all cell types. As a consequence, clones created from a cell taken from an adult might have chromosomes that are already shorter than normal, which may condemn the clones' cells to a shorter life span. Indeed, dolly, who was cloned from the cell of a 6-year-old sheep, had chromosomes that were shorter than those of other sheep her age. Dolly died when she was six years old, about half the average sheep's 12-year lifespan.

As reproductive medicine and molecular biology advanced, the first child initiated by in vitro fertilization was born in 1978 at royal oldham hospital, united kingdom; and researchers succeeded in blastomere separation, or blastomere cloning, in 1993 at george washington university, united states. Science fiction remained firmly in the picture, with david rorvik’s in his image, published in 1978. Rorvik, a science writer, claimed that he had been a part of a clandestine project to clone a human being, and although experts believe that the book is a hoax, the idea sat deeply in the popular imagination. Theologians, now including protestants and catholics as well as jewish and islamic thinkers and representatives of other faith traditions continued to keep the issue on the agenda. Their assessments ranged from buddhist, catholic and conservative protestant condemnation to hindu, jewish and moderate protestant caution. 7.

Another concern is that because cloning is an asexual way of reproducing it would decrease genetic variation among offspring and, in the long run, might even constitute a threat to the human race. The gene pool may narrow sufficiently to threaten humanity’s resistance to disease (ama 1999, 6). In response, it has been argued.

Plastic, reconstructive, and cosmetic surgery. Because of human cloning and its technology the days of silicone breast implants and other cosmetic procedures that may cause immune disease should soon be over. With the new technology, instead of using materials foreign to the body for such procedures, doctors will be able to manufacture bone, fat, connective tissue, or cartilage that matches the patient’s tissues exactly. Anyone will able to have their appearance altered to their satisfaction without the leaking of silicone gel into their bodies or the other problems that occur with present-day plastic surgery. Victims of terrible accidents that deform the face should now be able to have their features repaired with new, safer, technology. Limbs for amputees may be able to be regenerated.

Secular philosophers warmed up to the discussion mainly as critics of the critical theological views. In a prescient 1982 contribution, british philosopher ruth chadwick listed the main objections to cloning, addressed and refuted them from a preference utilitarian point of view. 8 the arguments she tackled concerned unnaturalness, functioning, playing god, rights to genetic uniqueness and privacy, worthwhile lives, preferences, and side effects to society and to the gene pool. On the surface, chadwick considered none of these unduly alarming. According to her, unnaturalness is a philosophically dead concept; cloned humans could function just fine; accusations of playing god can be replaced by risk assessment; identical twins prove that genetic uniqueness is not always essential; our genetic constitution can become known in other ways; we may or may not prefer to be genetically unique (especially when the alternative is that we do not exist at all); side effects to society need not be so bad; and the impact on the gene pool could probably be controlled.

Chadwick’s list has ever since constituted the core of the standard utilitarian ‘frequently asked questions and answers’ pattern on cloning and other emerging technologies. Authors from different schools of thought can challenge such observations, 9 but the stance within the utilitarian tradition has been unshaken. This is why the truly interesting details of chadwick’s contribution are in the snide remarks she makes against the unquestioned utilitarian confidence in technology. These touch upon worthwhile lives and possible side effects to society, individuals and the gene pool. Preference utilitarians who want to maximize worthwhile lives are logically committed to the view that we have a duty to turn as many somatic cells as we can into new human beings. This seems a stretch. Moreover, detrimental impacts on society are, if not inevitable, still possible. The industrial production of lower-class citizens, the potentially reduced self-esteem of cloned individuals, and the effects of mass cloning on the gene pool are matters that should be reflected on carefully, not just ignored in the hope that everything will be fine. 10 a thorough risk assessment of cloning combined with genetic engineering would be a start, although philosophers are also becoming increasingly aware of a need to involve citizens in such evaluations, and subsequent decisions. 11.

Nothing could be done to a person created by cloning that right now could not be done to your brother or to a person’s twin. The u. S. Constitution strongly implies that once a human fetus is outside the womb and alive, he has rights. Decisions backing this up give him rights to inherit property, rights not to suffer discrimination because of disability, and rights to u. S. Citizenship.

Leon kass, a conservative american ethicist, asserted in 1998 that cloning is wrong, because it distorts family relationships and our sense of human dignity. 20 apart from the spontaneous disgust that we feel when we think about unnatural ways of making babies, 21 we have good grounds for rejecting cloning as an asexual form of procreation. The continuous renewal of humanity, according to kass, relies on heterosexual families and children born as an intended outcome of sex between men and women. Organisms that reproduce asexually are selfish and only concerned with passing on their own genome as a whole. Human beings, in contrast, engage in (hetero)sexual activities for different motives. Men and women come pleasurably together to mix their genomes and to bring about new life that is not identical with theirs. Their own inimitable genome as such dies in the process, but something more important is born: another unique member of the human family that can be taught the ways and faith of its parents and community. Human cloning as an asexual method of creating progeny would distort the sense of family and natural relationships within it. Cloning would irrevocably confuse the essential concepts of being a mother, a father, a child, an aunt, an uncle, and so on, and humanity as we know it would come to its end.

---