Cloning Is Ethically and Morally Wrong

Cloning is Ethically and Morally Wrong

The question shakes us all to our very souls. For humans to consider the cloning of one another forces them all to question the very concepts of right and wrong that makes them all human. The cloning of any species, whether they be human or non-human, is ethically and morally wrong. Scientists and ethicist alike have debated the implications of human and non-human cloning extensively since 1997; when scientist at the Roslin Institute in Scotland produced Dolly. No direct conclusions have been drawn, but compelling arguments state that cloning of both human and non-human species results in harmful physical and psychological effects on both groups. The following issues dealing with cloning and its ethical and moral implications will be addressed: Cloning of human beings would result in severe psychological effects in the cloned child, and that the cloning of non-human species subject them to unethical or moral treatment for human needs.

The possible physical damages that could be done if human cloning became a reality is obvious when one looks at the sheer loss of life that occurred before the birth of Dolly. On 10 March, 1997 an article was published in Time Magazine Ð'ЃgWill we follow the Sheep?Ð'Ѓh Jeffery Kluger points out:

Ð'ЃgLess than ten percent of the initial transfers survive

to be healthy creatures. There were 277 trial implants

of nuclei. Nineteen of those 277 were deemed healthy

while the others were discarded. Five of those

nineteen survived, but four of them died within ten

days of birth of server abnormalities. Dolly was the

only one to survive.Ð'Ѓh

If those nuclei were human, Kluger adds: Ð'ЃgThe cellular body count would look like sheer carnage.Ð'Ѓh Even Ian Wilmut, one of the scientist accredited with the cloning phenomenon at the Roslin Institute and Kluger agree that, Ð'ЃgÐ'Ѓgthe more you interfere with reproduction, the more danger there is of things going wrong.Ð'ЃhÐ'Ѓh The psychological effects of cloning are less obvious, but none the less, very plausible. In addition to physical harms, there are worries about the psychological harms on cloned human children. One of those harms is the loss of identity, or sense of uniqueness and individuality. Many argue that cloning crates serious issues of identity and individuality and forces humans to consider the definition of self. Gilbert Meilaender commented on the importance of genetic uniqueness not only to the child, but to the parent as well. Kluger emphasizes that: Ð'ЃhChildren begin with a kind of genetic independence of [the parent].Ð'Ѓh This means they replicate neither their father nor their mother. That is a reminder of the independence that the parent must eventually grant them. Kluger concludes with a passage that we all should take into consideration:

Ð'ЃgHans Jonas suggests that humans have an inherent right