A Controversy Over The Idea of Human Cloning

Cloning has been a controversial topic over the globe since before Dolly the sheep was cloned in 1996, and it has recently turned into a real possibility that seems to be considerably more attainable now than it was twenty years ago. (The National Human Genome Research Institute n.d.) The accomplishment of having the capacity to clone a creature moved researchers to ponder about a more difficult task, cloning people. To start off with, cloning is a procedure that involves grouping of same cells or living beings that all get from one individual. It isn't known when or how cloning people will turn into a possibility. However, it is understood that there are two conceivable ways that we can clone people. The first method includes parting a fetus into a few pieces and making numerous new people from that one embryo. (Wikipedia, 2018) The second approach for cloning a human includes taking cells from an existing individual and cloning them, thusly making different people that are identical to that specific individual. (Wikipedia, 2018) With these two techniques nearly available, two critical questions arise. Can we do this, and would it be a good idea for us too?

The idea of cloning humans is ethically wrong and ought not to be stood for. A few people seem not to understand the adverse effects that cloning would bring into a world. Religious outlooks, the expansion of the population, and every human's personality are only a couple of the supporting reasons that stand against cloning and support why it ought not to be legalized. Just because there are a couple of variables that might look beneficial it does not cancel out the harm that it would bring. One supporter that stands for cloning, Simon Smith, says that it is valuable to create clones for fertility reasons, for example, infertile couples and couples carrying a hereditary illness. (Smith, 1998) This statement appears to be reasonable; nevertheless, there are other alternatives available such as adoption, artificial insemination, and surgeries that are more suitable.

It seems to be controversial regarding whether a man needs to create a clone offspring of themselves would be a degenerate or selfish in needing to do such a thing. There are supporters of cloning, for example, Professor Robert Winston who claim that cloning would be a viable alternative accessible to those individuals who have lost a friend or family member in death. (Wikipedia, 2018) Have we overlooked our ideals and that with the introduction of life, one day will come passing? It's not something most people anticipate for themselves or for anybody they cherish however unavoidably one day it will approach every one of us.

The personality of everyone is also another factor to consider when thinking about the result cloning would bring. The personality of people and different animals are the things that influence you to care for them and create a bond, not their physical appearance. Having a clone that is just only similar in appearance and not in identity or character would not bring back a lost cherished one. Instead, it could even make it considerably harder for people to cope and manage. If clones were created, we would lose that uniqueness. Having human clones in presence would be an insult to mankind and the uniqueness of each person. It would change being human. Clones could likely wind up as another minority battling for equal rights. Would you be able to envision what it may feel like to realize that you were a clone of another person? Would you feel inferior compared to human life and all that it brings? Would you even have a soul? These are the questions that researchers should really consider. The developing population in the United States and in different nations around the globe is additionally an important factor to consider. In spite of the fact that it is extraordinary to have "fountain of youth," it doesn't appear to be particularly effective.

If people essentially "wouldn't die" than the population would be a lot larger than it right now is. On the off chance that individuals were experiencing an additional fifty years or more, the world would wind up noticeably turbulent. We already expend many resources that we have to survive and are doing very little to renew them so imagine with everyone sticking around. In addition, researchers after a timeframe could even advance clones to be the perfect human race.

The DNA of clones could be controlled after extensive research to influence them to have particular qualities and perhaps mentality too. (The History of DNA, n.d.) They could be made to have a specific capacity in life, for example, turning into an Olympic swimmer or even an executing machine in the armed force, modified to head out to war. What Hitler was attempting to finish during the Holocaust could potentially move toward becoming a reality if clones somehow managed to be made. It has been suggested that not long from now, cloning advances could progress to the level where they could even reproduce a deceased person as a full grown adult. They could most likely even recreate there past memories and encounters. There doesn't appear to be any moral worries for this, as distorted as its idea ends up being. Richard McCormick essentially summarizes the message that society is as of now twisted and with cloning technology advancing, we have to be careful about the future. (Richard, n.d. ) Regardless of what we say or do, research about cloning will continue without a doubt, and much more moral issues will arise.

The adage goes, if it's not broke, don't fix it. This saying should apply to clone similarly too. Alongside the logical achievements, it would convey to humankind many damaging results. It might appear like many discoveries could happen if established researchers get cloning somehow to be legal, however just bringing about having merely a couple of advantages and numerous defeats. The likely results that would exist in its sanctioning do not make it being performed ethically right.