Before considering the ethics of human cloning the issues of safety must first be considered. The present cloning technology is elementary. Ian Wilmut a Scottish embryologist who was part of the research team that cloned Dolly knows about the safety issues surrounding clon

unclear parentage there is no guarantee the child would be properly cared for. With the introduction of cloning social and family life would take on a new face.

Human cloning also takes away from the significance of procreation and this carries with it a religious connection. Opponents of human cloning declare that this is a form of playing God. It allows people to have absolute control over the genetic identity of others. Consequently, this leads to a withered view of life. Being able to create humans, essentially in a test tube, makes life seem like a set of chemical reactions. Lyons says it well in his article stating that: “As for creating life artificially, there is something special about humans being created out of an act of love, not chemistry” (496). Wachbroit concludes this emotion by quoting theologian Gilbert Meilaender, Jr on the unnatural birth of a clone. Meilaender states a cloned child would be “designed as a product” rather that “welcomed as a gift” (7). I for one am a not strictly religious person but the idea of a natural childbirth just seems right. Childbirth is a very special thing and it is honored in all cultures. A man and a woman getting married and having a baby natural means is how it’s supposed to be. Additionally, a certain amount of chance should be involved with having a child, as far as not knowing what physical characteristics the child will have: whether the kid have the father’s nose or the mother’s eyes. Parents need to be able to look at the child and see a little bit of their selves; an exact copy leaves nothing to the imagination. To sum up, it is hard to find the words to explain this exact position, however the notion of human cloning just feels wrong and very unnatural.

In conclusion I have come to the belief that the cons far outweigh the pros on the issue of human cloning. The concern of the danger involved with successfully being able to clone a human being is proof enough for me that human cloning should never be permitted or even attempted. Considering various ethical and religious objections, I believe that there is a very strong case for not allowing human cloning to take place. In Linda Bevington’s article she writes: “No reason has been advanced that is weighty enough to justify overlooking the considerable hazards described herein and resorting to cloning as a means of human reproduction” (2). However there are proponents of cloning that have the exact opposite opinion on the matter. Ruth Macklin in her article, “Human Cloning? Don’t Just Say No”, states that: “While human cloning might not offer great benefits to humanity, no one has yet made a persuasive case that it would do any real harm” (498). Even though it is true that we will never really know

Some topics in this essay:
Linda Bevington, Gone Far”, Meilaender Jr, Genome Project, Jeff Lyon, Linda Bevington’s, Don’t No”, Robert Wachbroit, human cloning, False Legacy”, Human Cloning, cloned child, family life, cloned children, human cloning banned, child cloned, cloning banned, human genome, ethics human, wachbroit 5, “asexual reproduction”, fetuses newborns children, unproved technological safety, ethics human cloning, issue human cloning,