Do you think cloning is morally acceptable?

Question

it's for Ethics

Answer 1

Nope, I think that's going a little too far!*

Answer 2

I have no problem with cloning animals. An example of what purpose I think can be served by cloning: Charmayne James, champion barrel racing rider, owned a horse named Scamper, who was national champion barrel race horse 10 times.

When James bought Scamper, he was a gelding. (I.e., for those who don't know what a gelding is, he had been castrated and so could never reproduce.) Scamper was gelded before anyone know how superior he was physically. So he couldn't pass on his superior genes.

But Charmayne James, his owner, paid to have him cloned so that a genetically identical, uncastrated version would be available for breeding: http://www.physorg.com/news82869401.html

This is, I believe, the best use of the cloning technology.

With regard to cloning of human beings, I think there are some very strong ethical arguments against this, the most telling being that at this time, many of the cloning attempts with animals fail or result in births of individuals with severe physical defects. I think you need to ask the question: what about the flawed individuals who might be born in the attempt to clone a human being?

However, I think all the ethical arguments in the world don't matter. The technology exists. The genie is out of the bottle. Sooner or later, someone somewhere is going to attempt to clone a human being, and someone is going to succeed. It's just a matter of time and money.

Answer 3

Absolutely! Provided the clone is granted an identity unique to it, rather than be viewed as an extension of the original. Clones should be viewed as the offspring of the original.

As for clones not having souls, that is nonsense. The spark of life itself is evidence of God's approval. Without His OK, life does not occur and so, any successful clone is proof in and of itself of a soul.

The creation of a clone should be motivated only by the same thing that drives a parent to want a child. Not for their own betterment, but to create life for the sake of doing so.

Answer 4

This would depend on the viewpoint someone takes, but personally, I feel that it is difficult to allow. Cloning anything tends to leave the clone at a severe disadvantage to its parent. Often times, the clone suffers immeasureable pain, dying much sooner than the parent. Because of this, I'd have to say Cloning is just a waste of a life.

Answer 5

No, I dont. The reasons are many. 1st, you are trying to play God. Is it right to genetically alter someone so that they are superior or more to your liking? Which of course means the rich will be superior to all in yet another way. what if your purpose is to just create a super "human"? Is that not cheating, just like taking steriods in sports?

2nd, they would have to figure out if they would be considered people or not. Many people would not give them human status which would create a whole new problem of slavery, organ harvesting etc. What if they were to produce children? What if they had children with a "regular" person. Would they be equal to the person who they were cloned from? Being that they would be identical in every biological way? There goes DNA evidence for crimes.

Answer 6

It depends on what we are cloning and why. Cloning animals for research or extra food is fine with me. Cloning humans for scientific research or spare parts is not morally acceptable, in my opinion.

Answer 7

No. Until they can figure out how to make a soul for the clone. I want to watch that one.

Answer 8

Gimme that cloned beef, yummy. It is after all, all the same, isn't it?

Answer 9

it would be ok for the military to clone

Answer 10

I have written about this for school once. It is in MS word.
http://www.greyfades.com/AIM%20Progs/Arguments%20of%20Cloning.doc