How the media has trained people on the ethics of cloning
What a lot of people don’t know, is that cloning has been around for some time now. Not only in the scientific field, but cloning has also been a reaccuring theme in many books and movies throughout time. Before any of us even heard about the story of Dolly, before we even read a single article on the subject, the media had already had us trained on the ethics of cloning. The way cloning has been represented over time through books and movies, and the way the media has presented it since Dolly, has shaped the way the American masses currently view cloning. Unfortunately, the media has often gotten its own facts wrong, leading to public and political confusion on the subject resulting in a controversial moratorium on all forms of cloning. When the clone of Dolly was announced, people quickly learned that cloning was a reality and not just part of the movies any more, and the media was right there to tell them what to expect. The actual process of cloning cells is called “nuclear transplantation” and has been around since 1952. According to Stein, “The procedure of nuclear transplantation was developed by Robert Briggs and Thomas J. King in Philadelphia… First tested in amphibians, then the procedure was soon ext
Science states that stem cells are not “individualized” and are generic cells that can ultimately become anything until they are implanted into a woman’s womb prior to day 14 of fertilization and researchers are promising to destroy all embryos before that stage occurs (Geller, Gail). Religious groups think this is still an exploitation of developing human life. Perhaps one of the best examples of a cloning movie would be the 1978 classic “The Boys from Brazil.” In this movie a mad Nazi psychopathic scientist takes samples of blood from Adolf Hitler and impregnates about a hundred women with the “baby Hitler.” He even tries to replicate Hitler’s upbringing in hopes that one of the children will turn out to be another exact Hitler. He even sends out men to kill the children’s fathers at a young age, just as what happened to Hitler. The scientist fails to reproduce Hitler’s upbringing well enough to produce another Hitler and the movie is ended with a feeling that environment can overcome genetics (Ribalow 41). I feel I should at least mention a couple other classic movies that are based around the “clone” theme to give you more of an idea how much we’ve grown accustom to watching “body doubles” in movies. Metropolis (1926), Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1956), Multiplicity (1996), The Steopford Wives (1975), The Clonus Horror (1978), Sleepers (1973), The Human Duplicators (1965), Creator (1985), and Species (1995) (Ribalow 40). I personally cannot stop thinking about all the suffering people in the world who might someday be cured of aliments from this new therapeutic cloning technology if the ban is lifted so it can some day finally get the research done to find these cures. Because someday who knows, the person suffering in the hospital could be my own flesh and blood, or maybe even me. Our generation and some before have grown up watching these genetically engineered movies that generally center around two themes. They are: that clones always turn out to be different from their originals, often in a destructive way, and that the people who creating these beings usually misjudge their power to control them. Ribalow explains “ The helplessness of the creator to harness the clone remains a major theme even in the most recent cloning films. In both Jurassic Park (1993) and its 1997 sequel The Lost World, the cloned creatures run amuck” (40). Throughout our lives the media has shown us the possible downfalls of a technology that was never even thought imaginable, until recently. We’ve been trained to fear cloning in all aspects. The word “cloning” alone is enough to send fear and outrage into the hearts of many people. The concept of cloning has been used over and over again in Hollywood movies. Over time these movies have created public fears and stereotypes about cloning. The danger of making a perfect creature (“You must never create a robot that can outsmart you”) and the superiority of the cloners (“Knowledge, especially advanced knowledge, should be entrusted to the select few: the superior minds”) (Ribalow 41). Films about human photocopy reflect fright and hatred of a phenomenon that does not need to be understood to smack horror into ones soul. I believe people are afraid that they will lose their uniqueness, their individual identities, and their very souls, to a science they can only barely understand and can certainly not control. The idea that a person can be replaced by an “other” and not be missed even by his or her nearest and dearest has long been pervasive. The story of the double who will make a person irrelevant, even nonexistent, has roots in literature that are centuries old (Ribalow 41). Is it right to use embryonic stem cells, that would have never existed anyhow, if not to save someone’s life? Technology believes that these cells have the potential to cure diseases like Parkinson’s, Rett Syndrome,
Some topics in this essay:
Lori Andrews,
Lost World,
Rett Syndrome,
House Representatives,
Jurassic Park,
,
King Philadelphia…,
Severino Antinori,
Aldous Huxley,
Heart Disease,
therapeutic cloning,
stem cells,
embryonic stem,
ribalow 41,
reproductive cloning,
cloning technology,
nuclear transplantation,
save lives,
embryonic stem cells,
stems cells,
generic stems cells,
ban cloning,
difference reproductive therapeutic,
reproductive therapeutic cloning,
Join now to see the rest of the essay!
Approximate Word count = 3198
Approximate Pages = 13 (250 words per page double spaced)
|