Against Human Cloning for Many

¶ … Against Human Cloning

For many decades, the scientific idea for human cloning has, for the most part, only been discussed in the realm of science fiction, but in today's highly technical world, human cloning has almost become a reality which has to be discussed and examined with much caution and the use of hard facts. In essence, the arguments for and against human cloning vary widely; some scientist and researchers claim that human cloning will lead to great advances in medicine and how diseases are treated, and while this may be true, human cloning itself is a major violation against our embodied and engendered selves as human beings and has the potential to destroy the social relations as designed by nature.

First of all, human cloning has the potential to completely alter the future of a human being, especially in relation to the unborn, and violates the right to choose how a person lives his/her own life and the right to be a unique human being, both mentally and physically. Also, it is a violation on the part of the clone itself, meaning that he/she will be deprived of the opportunity to live within a viable future, not to mention that all the important aspects of a person will be known beforehand, such as physical appearance and abilities which will place a huge burden on the person as to the expectations of others.

Robert Wachbroit adds to this argument by stating that cloned individuals "would be wronged in morally significant ways... being "the right to an open future." For example, "a child might be constantly compared to the adult from whom he/she was cloned and thereby burdened with oppressive expectations... Finally... A child might be burdened with the thought that he/she is a copy and not an original, (affecting) the child's sense of self-worth or individuality or dignity... " (Internet, 1999).

Second, it is quite obvious that human cloning is a repugnant activity when compared to the normal method of human reproduction. According to Glenn McGee, "those who oppose human cloning point to the repugnance of a style of reproduction with such profound potential for vanity, arguing that the freedom of children and (the) nature of the family are in danger" (Internet, 2001). Basically, human cloning is an asexual process, meaning that it involves no type of sexual activity between two consenting persons. This makes the process comparable to many lower forms of life, such as bacteria, algae, fungi and a number of lower invertebrates. In the scope of human sexuality, life is generally begun by two individuals through love and nurturing; however, with human cloning, this process is voided because love and nurturing play no role whatsoever. Thus, human cloning goes completely against human nature and allows any individual to purchase or even "place an order" for another human being. Also, human cloning can be compared to slavery, for the clone is nothing more than a product, much like a slave under the control of its master.

In addition, human cloning will create an identity crisis within the cloned individual. For example, a child might be born with only one biological parent, due to the fact that the clone is an exact duplicate of the donor. Also, the clone could be the offspring of a complete stranger with no biological/hereditary ties to the clone. In essence, the clone will be its own parents which could lead to some extremely confusing events once the cloned individual is "born." In support of this, a scientist credited with the creation of "Dolly," the first cloned animal, stated that "the cloning of humans (is) appalling because it would result in a number of... deaths among newborns (and) could also change family dynamics in profound and unpredictable ways. " Also, "there is no current scientific justification for attempting to produce a human being at this time" (Internet, "Human Cloning," 1998).