Reproductive Cloning is Immoral

Reproductive Cloning is Immoral - Guertin 1 Michael Guertin...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Guertin 1 Michael Guertin Writing 140 Maggie Flynn October 25, 2007 Assignment #3 Reproductive Cloning: The Unethical Dangers French philosopher Albert Schweitzer once stated, “The farmer who mows a blossoming meadow to feed his animals with the colorful crop is morally justified; but the same farmer who thoughtlessly tears off a single flower on the way home infringes of the moral law for the respect of creation and its beauty” (“Thou Shalt Not Clone”). He illustrates that the purpose behind the action is what distinguishes it from being moral and immoral. Similarly, cloning takes many forms that must be evaluated for the purpose it serves and the morality that it entails. Therapeutic cloning and research cloning may be permissible at certain instances, but, rather, reproductive cloning is virtually never acceptable. By cloning human beings for reproductive intentions, it infringes upon the moral law for the respect of creation and beauty of human life. Cloning and other forms of genetic engineering might pave the path for the future, but sometimes the substance used for paving is immoral in itself. Although the reproductive cloning of humans may be similar to identical twins and in vitro fertilization, the potential dangers outweigh the potential benefits because the ensuing elitism and restricted individuality undermine the necessity of human autonomy. Cloning is morally permissible because it is strikingly similar to identical twins and in vitro fertilization, which are prevalent in today’s society. When determining the ethics of human cloning, it is important to consider that humans produce natural clones on a fairly regular basis. From a scientific standpoint, monozygotic twins both stem from the same fertilized cell and the result after the cell division is two genetically identical human individuals (Tannert). Supporters
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Guertin 2 of reproductive cloning might contend that identical twins are considered moral in society, and cloning should be too since it resembles the process of identical twins so closely. However, identical twins are not perfect copies of each other even though they are mostly identical externally and internally. Also, the similarity between clones and the genetic identity of natural twins differs from the elements of choice and chance. When identical twins are conceived, it is simply a random occurrence of the cell developments throughout the biological process. The genetic material of the identical twins has experienced considerable reshuffling and recombination through the gamete development process. Other naturally conceived embryos undergo this process and the emergence of identical twins can only be attributed to random occurrence and pure chance. On the other hand, a cloned being is the product of a deliberate decision made by a third party. The distinguishing factor between identical twins and cloned individuals is the degree of chance versus a premeditated choice. An advocate of reproductive cloning might also cite in vitro fertilization as a similar process in order to justify cloning as
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Page1 / 7

Reproductive Cloning is Immoral - Guertin 1 Michael Guertin...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online