Human Cloning Essay, Research Paper

The theory of adult DNA cloning is astoundingly simple: one takes the nucleus of a cellfrom an adult, which contains the adult s genes (DNA), and transfers it into an egg in place of that egg s own nucleus. The egg, placed in a surrogate womb can now develop into a baby that will grow to an exact copy of the adult. In reality the practice of cloning is more complicated. The only animal to have been produced this way is the now world famous Dolly. Dr. Ian Wilmut of the Roslin Institute in Roslin, Scotland, achieved in July of 1996 what was assumed to be impossible in all mammals. A cell was taken from the mammary tissue of a mature six-year-old sheep while its DNA was in a dormant state. It was fused with a sheep ovum, whose nucleus removed. Many cell fusions were performed, yet only one lamb, Dolly was born. The idea of cloning has sparked tremendous controversy. Some scientists believe that human embryo cloning and other related research can produce positive results. It may bring about greater understanding of the causes of miscarriages, which in turn may lead to new treatments to prevent spontaneous abortions. The experience gained in cloning may add to our understanding of genetics and lead to the creation of animal organs, which may be genetically altered so that they can be transplanted into humans. Parents who are known to be at risk of passing a genetic defect to a child, might clone a fertilized ovum, and that duplicate could then be tested for disease or disorder. Since artistic ability seems to run in families, some might use the DNA from the cell of an adult with the desired traits or talent, to produce a child with a similar potential. Cloning might be a solution for infertile couples or for people with leukemia in need of a compatible bone marrow to combat the disease. Despite the many advantages however, I feel that human DNA cloning should not be performed. I think that this scientific procedure is unethical and morally improper, because it fails to consider the fallibility of human achievements and it violates the boundary between the human and the super human. From a Judeo-Christian standpoint, human cloning is unacceptable because every human comes into being through a unique and creative act of God. Cloning therefore shatters the dignity of reproduction and contradicts natural law, which is divinely ordained. What rights do humans have in playing God? We are not the Creator and the responsibility to assume control of the universe is not ours. Although Catholicism has an absolute prohibition against cloning, many Jewish thinkers do not consider cloning intrinsically or absolutely wrong. The Jewish perspective is that cloning is but a technology, and as such, is morally neutral. The question, though, is to what use does one put this technology? If the process is used to exploit people for their organs or to enhance or eliminate certain cosmetic features, cloning is unethical. But, if cloning is done to save a person with leukemia by creating a matching bone-marrow donor, cloning is ethically justified. Thus cloning is permitted only if it offers benefits for the common good.

The Bible (the Old Testament), from which all of Jewish Law is derived, states that children should be conceived within a marital union between members of the opposite sex. If a child is not conceived according to the laws of nature, Jewish law renders this child fatherless. As a result the child loses his or her link to his or her parents, and this genealogical loss potentially dissolves the child s ties to the community. (In the Jewish Orthodox community, adoption takes place only when the child s biological parents can be traced.) Since Judaism is very intent on maintaining close family ties, it would be morally improper to create a situation as such, whereby the obvious result would be a negation of one of the fundamental aspects of Judaism. Aside from religion, another issue to consider is the possible effect cloning could have on society and its social organization. Engaging in cloning involves a kind of hubris that says that humans are capable of determining their own destiny, says Joel Shuman, a visiting lecturer at Duke University Divinity School in Durham, N.C. The following is a radical example to illustrate my point. Suppose a group of people in power want to establish a new kind of social order. In order to accomplish their mission they need to force people into obedience. Employing police to do so is to arduous and time consuming, but with the help of cloning they will be able to produce human beings with a genetic make up catered specifically to their needs. This could lead to a social nightmare, to a kind of genetic totalitarianism that would be disastrous to humankind. Clones would be human beings created to fulfill the will of another human being, says David Byers, Director of the Committee on Science and Human Values of the U.S. Catholic Conference. Many Americans feel very confused about DNA technology. A CNN poll conducted among 1005 American adults on March first 1997, found that eighty-nine per cent felt that cloning humans was morally unacceptable, sixty-six per cent felt that animal cloning was unacceptable as well. Sixty-nine per cent are scared of the possibility of cloning, and seventy- four per cent believe that human cloning is against God s will.To me the moral, ethical and social issues by far outweigh the advantages of cloning. It is true that science is very exciting and that it is very easy to get carried away with the technological imperative that says Come on, if we can do it, let s do it and see what happens! Yet one must not lose sight of the ethical imperative that asks, Is this something that should be done?