Is the cost of a life worth that of a loved one?
Human cloning is a topic that has existed since the 1970’s when Dr. John Gurdon cloned a frog. From cloning a frog in 1970 to cloning a sheep in 1997, the technological advances in cloning have exponentially increased. The concept of human cloning is to retrieve the DNA of a human and place it into the embryo of a woman and the child born 9 months later would be a replica of the original person. This technique would be useful if a person need plasma, blood, or possible organs. To attempt to transplant baby organs to an adult however; the baby would have to grow into an adult. So instead of raising clones to be killed for the original human, scientists have thought about trying to copy human organs. By using DNA of a person’s organs they could then make a copy of it before it was ill and transplant it into the patient, this is the more reasonable thing to do. The two sides of human cloning is the side who believes that human cloning is morally, ethically, and religiously wrong and the side that believes that cloning could save countless lives and bring happiness to countless families. As a logical person I do see the possible benefits of human cloning but I believe that the results of cloning a single human would horrible disturb our already shaky way of life.
The capabilities of cloning a human are endless and can help countless amounts of people. Human cloning can used to advance not only the life spans of patients, make new life, and advance the medical field. As stated earlier a clone of a person could be made and used as cattle for organs for the original. With that in mind, it would require the medical field to condone murder, which it cannot do.
The thought of using human cloning to have a child seems far more reasonable but even that has its own risks. “Even with practiced efforts, some 25 percent of cloned animals have overt problems. Attempting to clone a human would be so risky; it would be like sending a baby up into space in a rocket that has a 50-50 chance of blowing up.” (Choi) Meaning that even though a family may have to pay $200,000 for a clone child that comes out deformed or even not at all. There would be an even greater risk because human cloning has not been too much studied into due to laws, so the test subjects have a greater risk of failure. Even with the risks, people still fight over if human cloning should be legalized. The argument is that “A federal district court has interpreted the right to make procreative decisions to include the right of an infertile couple to undergo medically assisted reproduction, including the use of in vitro fertilization and a donated embryo.” (Smith) Meaning that the government sees fit that is a person’s choice to seek medical help if infertile, whether it be vitro or donated embryo, but not cloning. Cloning could also be a way for a couple to have a child that is related to them, yet is not legalized because the government is...