Human Cloning - Saskatchewan Elocution and Debate Association

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Seeing Double: The Cloning Conundrum Page 4 of 8 Canadian Speeches, November-December 2002 how to switch cells on and off, enabling them to cure cancer. It will also help them understand why cancerous cells lose their differentiation and divide at a faster rate. • Leukemia. Cloning bone marrow for children and adults suffering from leukemia is expected to be one of the first benefits reaped from cloning technology. • Cystic fibrosis. There is a strong possibility that scientists may be able to produce effective genetic therapy against cystic fibrosis. Ian Wilmut and colleagues are already working on this. • Spinal Injury. Christopher Reed, the paralyzed film actor who played the title role in a Superman movie, is among those urging research on growing nerves or spinal cords for paralyzed people to regain control of movement. None of these possible treatments have been tested on humans yet, but Dr. Robert Lanza, working with ACT, created working artificial kidneys from cells taken from cloned cow embryos. The kidneys were implanted into the cow whose DNA generated the clone and were not rejected. The cow is alive and healthy today. The other treatment possibilities are not yet confirmed, and some skeptics say they are unlikely to develop many of these treatments for humans. DEFINING INDIVIDUALITY BY GENETICS Cloning cells to treat illness is one thing: cloning a whole person is an entirely different matter. The physical health risks to clones are of dire concern, as are the potential psychological harms to cloned children. The most frequent fear voiced by psychologists is the possible loss of a sense of uniqueness and individuality. Reproductive cloning creates serious issues of identity and forces society to reevaluate how we define ourselves. Gilbert Meilaender, in his testimony before ANBAC on March 13, 1997, commented on the importance of genetic uniqueness: "Our children begin with a kind of genetic independence of us, their parents. They replicate neither their father nor their mother. That is a reminder of their independence..." Reproductive cloning would create a genetic twin separated only by time. With the identical appearance of a person that has already lived, expectations for this twin could be very high. If one was to clone Albert Einstein, people would expect the clone to be a scientific genius, and he would always be forced to compare him or herself to his genetic predecessor's accomplishments, some argue. However, this argument disregards the natural phenomena of many identical twins, who grow up to have distinctly different personalities, with no serious psychological harm because of their identical DNA. Others say that the concept that a clone is less unique, less distinct, and less in control of his or her own destiny discriminates against not only potential clones, but also naturally-identical twins. But philosopher Hans Jonas feels differently on the subject of twins. Jonas argues that human cloning, where there is a time gap between the genetically identical individuals, and the simultaneous beginning of life for naturally identical twins are fundamentally different. Naturally-identical twins grow up at the same time, each unaware of the other person's future life choices. This ignorance of what their genetic counterpart's life choices will be gives them a future where they are free to choose their own direction in life. However, if a twin is later created by cloning, it grow up with the knowledge of what place their older twin had in the world, and a sense that its life has already been played out. This later twin, Jonas claims, would lose his sense of spontaneity and the authenticity of becoming a unique self. Jonas claims that it is tyrannical and cruel for the earlier twin to try and determine another's fate this way. Even if the later twin did not believe in genetic determinism, and led a life of its own, it would still be haunted and influenced by the life of its predecessor. Its life might be shaped by its predecessor in ways that other lives are not, because other lives are genetically unique. All these theories are quite speculative, and are directly related to cultural values. The psychological effect of growing up a clone is highly circumstantial, and subject to many uncertainties. A concern voiced by many is the legal and social status of a cloned child in the family structure. For some, the contrast between the child's genetic and social identity is a threat to the family structure. Questions about a cloned child's place in the family will not be easily answered. Because its genes will be identical to the
Seeing Double: The Cloning Conundrum Page 5 of 8 Canadian Speeches, November-December 2002 genes of one of its parents," questions such as "Are you my sibling or my parent?" or" Am I the child or the grandchild of my grandparents?" would inevitably be asked. The child's psychological development and social status could be at risk and the common family structure undermined. Some also say it may be harder for a child to gain independence from a parent who is actually his or her own twin. Others are not persuaded by such objections. Children born through other assisted reproductive technologies also have complicated relationships to their genetic, gestational, and rearing parents. There is no evidence that confusion over family roles has harmed children born into these families, but there have also been few studies on the subject. Another disturbing prospect to some people, is the fact that if this technology were legalized, women would not need men to procreate, causing what they say is a dangerous imbalance in gender equality. With this technology, the idea of "family" as we understand it, may irrevocably change. RELIGION VS. SCIENCE... AGAIN. Religious organizations are often the most prominent voices in the cloning debate. Almost every major organized religion has made an official statement on its position. Most condemn it, while a smaller number are advocates. Many of the bills proposed to ban human cloning, especially in the United States, make little reference to safety issues; they condemn human cloning regardless of whether it may prove that safe and effective. Religious perspectives and ethics are the predominant arguments. Proponents are often angry at some of the religious edicts and denunciations of cloning technology. Adrienne Ross, the mother of Trevor, a boy with a rare genetic disease, is trying to save her son by using therapeutic cloning with the help of ACT. She states bluntly, "To me, it's like how dare they tell me that I cannot save my son's life?... If you want to practice your religion, practice your religion, but not when it interferes with other people's lives." She feels that religious groups are telling her to "let your child die because my religious belief is more important than your child's life." Despite such antipathy by some, the religious perspectives plays a large part in the decisions society is make about this new technology. • Islam. The Islamic perspective on human cloning is deeply rooted in the Muslim beliefs and interpretations of the Qur'an, which is the believed to be directly from Allah. According to Professor Abdulaziz Sachedian, the Islamic assessment of reproductive cloning focuses predominantly on how the technology may effect familial relationships. He says that reproductive cloning would be permissible only within the male-female relationship to alleviate infertility. Therapeutic cloning is more permissible, but there is some debate as to the status of an embryo's human rights beginning after 40 days or 120 days in the womb. Since therapeutic cloning uses embryos under 14 days old, it poses few if any ethical problems for Muslims. Roman Catholicism. The official Roman Catholic position on human cloning is perhaps the most clear-cut. They zealously oppose both therapeutic and reproductive cloning and feel that "every possible act of cloning humans is intrinsically evil." Roman Catholics are opposed to therapeutic cloning because they give an embryo the status and rights of a born person, therefore it would be murder to create and then destroy an embryo purely for research. Their opposition to reproductive cloning is simply that, like many other artificial reproductive techniques, it severs human procreation from sexuality and marriage. • Protestantism. The large number of different denominations in Protestant Christendom preclude blanket statements. Fundamentalist and evangelical denominations such as the Southern Baptist Convention or the Lutheran Church official statements uniformly denounce both reproductive and therapeutic cloning. This is based on the belief that the creation and destruction of human embryos for research purposes is immoral, and that cloning turns procreation into manufacture instead of a union between a
Page 1 and 2: SASKATCHEWAN ELOCUTION AND DEBATE A
Page 3 and 4: Brave New World Page 1 of 5 Smithso
Page 9 and 10: If Not Today, Tomorrow Page 2 of 4
Page 11 and 12: If Not Today, Tomorrow Page 4 of 4
Page 13 and 14: Man and superman Page 2 of 3 The Ec
Page 15 and 16: Seeing Double: The Cloning Conundru
Page 17: Seeing Double: The Cloning Conundru
Page 21 and 22: Seeing Double: The Cloning Conundru
Page 23 and 24: Send in the clones Page 1 of 1 Cana
Page 25 and 26: The Threat of Biotech Page 2 of 3 C
Page 27 and 28: This embryonic cloning is worth pur
Page 29 and 30: Ban cloning. Do you copy? Page 2 of
Page 31: Ban cloning, not its life-saving co

Human Cloning - Saskatchewan Elocution and Debate Association

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?