The View From Here: I’m firmly against human cloning
Although no real proof has been shown that the world’s first human was cloned, claims it occurred are sure to spark worldwide debate.
We should all be troubled because cloning raises so many different questions about life, death, religion and how far we should push science. In short, it blows Darwin’s survival of the fittest idea right out of the water.
The description that came with this week’s announcement about the process is that a human is cloned by taking an egg, removing its genetic material, then taking a nucleus of any cell from the person to be cloned and inserting it into the egg. The cell is manipulated to force it to divide, the embryo is implanted and presto – a new human life.
It does have the potential for a lot of good – perhaps an army of really smart, strong and disposable clones – that is, until you start thinking that these would be real people. And can you imagine a baby being born to someone – most likely a well-to-do person – who just wants the baby’s body parts?
That begs the question of how far are we willing to go to make ourselves live longer. And how much more expensive will longevity be for the regulars who want nothing more than to make their way through the world naturally with only the help of traditional medicine and science, expensive as it is already?
Another frightening thought is the question of who we think we are. Perhaps we should be looking to the fiber of every major religion out there and reminding ourselves that most of them teach humility. We’re not supposed to be that great the first time around, and most of the time, we live up to that idea.
It is interesting however, to wonder how my clone would act under different circumstances. But then again, that’s just too strange for me to fathom.
The best reason I have for viewing human cloning with fear is that if ever real and popularized, human cloning is sure to put the old saying, “Let nature take its course,” out of circulation.
Every man out there should be alarmed to know they could be replaceable in terms of human reproduction versus cloning, if the process of human cloning as described really works. While appealing to the feminists of the world, perhaps a futurist generation of sameness isn’t all that great – neither for the social possibilities nor genetic diversity.
Questions of disease or disease resistance have also to be addressed. Do we really want clones of people subject to the same illnesses that we have failed to conquer?
It’s a subject that’s sure to bring so much more debate to the table. For now, I’m convinced that we have enough people, and problems, in the world and that cloning isn’t going to solve them.
How far should we go in science and medicine all in the name of reproduction?
One other ideas I’ve heard about cloning is that people could clone body parts as they become old. That whole scenario raises the question as to how long people could make themselves live if using cloned body parts. I’m pretty sure I’ve heard that longer lives today are attributed to advances in science – my grandfather was one of them – but with that has come a rise in health care costs for the rest of us.
News of this strange announcement by someone associated with a cult that believes aliens created mankind
I am purely against this because I believe we have enough people in the world and enough problems to go with it. How many people out there are starving, cold, addicted, plagued with AIDS, indigent or treacherous?
(Amy Satterwhite is a reporter for the Standard. She can be reached at 473-2191 or by e-mail at standard@blomand.net.)