Human Clone Ethics essays

Human Clone Ethics essays Most people think they know what cloning is. They would define it, probably, as taking a piece of one plant or animal and using it to make another just like it. In fact, Brannigan points out that the term "clone" was very likely first used in botany to describe the process of budding. (12) He also notes that Webster's digital dictionary explains that the word is from the Greek kion, which means "twig." Current uses of the term include scientifically oriented ones; scientists use the term to describe asexual reproduction of an identical copy of an organism, and is something that happens naturally in bacteria, algae, plants and yeast. In addition, it is the method by which the human body grows and repairs itself, although higher life forms gave it up as a reproductive method 500 million years ago, leaving it to only those primitive organism mentioned. (Brannigan, 12) Considering that "cloning" is a natural activity taking place in our bodies every daywhen we get a cut, grow some hair and so onand has been a factor of reproduction for a minimum of 501 million years, why is there a debate at all' If it is a natural process, why shouldn't humans have the Within the question lies part of the impetus for the debate. Cloning as debated by clergy, philosophers, and politicians is not natural but rather the result of interference and manipulation by scientists. To scientists, who see it as simply part of their job, there is no debate about doing it, although there is some about how far it should go. The following investigation will set forth some of the main arguments of the major professional stakeholders, that is, scientists, clergy, philosophers and politicians (who may or may not represent popular opinion). But first, there are some scientific realities, beyond the simple definition of the word, that bear examina...