please write a debate on " Human cloning - Is it boon or bane?"?

Question

human cloning

Answer 1

I have no idea what 'boon' and 'bane' means.

Answer 2

written by
Justice

Alan M. Dershowitz

Cloning



If human cloning is scientifically possible, then human beings will be cloned. Neither the law nor religion will stop the march of science, even if this march appears to be in the wrong direction. If there is one clear lesson of history, it is that whatever is physically possible will occur, despite the best efforts of moralists, legalists and religionists. This is not necessarily good, but it is inevitable.



Instead of trying to stop scientific progress (or regress), politicians ought to be thinking about ways of controlling the use of human cloning, rather than banning it, especially since national bans will do little to prevent cloning in places outside the legal reach of those countries that ban it. Even better, efforts ought to be made to channel this scientific breakthrough so as to achieve positive results. Some infertile couples will try anything to conceive a child, and many would prefer the child to have the genetic make up of one parent rather than a genetic composition including the genes of a stranger. Even if it is true, as some evolutionary scientists claim, that the species would clearly be better served by reproduction involving two sets of genes rather than one, some infertile couples will place their own short term interests above the long term interests of the human species. Accordingly, efforts should be directed at developing scientific methods for helping infertile couples to be able to use both of their own sets of genes to produce offspring.



The use of cloning to save existing life, as distinguished from bringing new life into the world, is clearly desirable and should not provoke much controversy except among rigid traditionalists who oppose all “unnatural” progress. Such traditionalists are almost always left in the dustbin of history, but not until they have made a distracting ruckus. Then there are those who would exploit cloning for their own selfish reasons. The Raelians - - the religious sect that claims to have cloned the first human baby - - see reproductive cloning as serving their peculiar religious mission of creating immortality among humans. The buttinsky lawyer from Florida who filed an absurd lawsuit seeking the appointment of a guardian for the cloned child the Raelians claim to have produced was plainly seeking publicity (that’s why I’m not mentioning his name). Pandering politicians can always be counted on to oppose anything that is not expressly authorized by the bible.



There are complex scientific and moral issues involved in reproductive cloning, and the two are closely related. Indeed, science drives morality in this case, as in many others. If the science is capable of producing perfectly normal individual clones that do not have a negative impact on the human species in general, the moral issues will be considerably different than if cloned children present both personal and evolutionary problems. But even if there are no scientific problems, there will be those who see moral concerns in the ability of human beings to replicate themselves without genetic input from another.



Many of these concerns differ only in degree from those resulting from more traditional methods of reproduction that are currently in widespread use throughout the world. For example, some forms of assisted reproduction result in large numbers of multiple births with genetically identical siblings. More and more single people are opting to have babies who they will raise unassisted. Although these children have two genetic parents, the emotional input is often limited to one parent. And both couples and individuals have children for questionable reasons - - ranging from a desperate desire to recreate themselves to an understandable need to produce a bone marrow donor for a sick child. Governments should tread lightly when it comes to regulating the motives for reproduction.



Religious zealots on both sides - - from the traditional churches to the very untraditional Raelians - - are unlikely to contribute much to the debate over cloning. Nor are politicians. This is an area where responsible scientists and open-minded moralists should work together to assure that science serves the moral interests of individual human beings as well as humankind in general.



From the beginning of time, science has been moved forward by mavericks willing to push the envelope, despite the insistence of traditionalists that change is always dangerous and immoral. Human reproductive cloning will take place, if not in the United States, then elsewhere. Only time and experience will tell whether it is a boon or a bane

Answer 3

you have to collect different opinions from different sources on that one, dude.

try going to evangelical websites and listen to the arguments in favor of bane, and then to the sites that may have a boon argument then you make an objective end to the assignment.

Answer 4

Write your OWN report, Tom Sawyer!

Answer 5

Do your own homework.