Moral Controversy- Cloning

Moral Controversy- Cloning

Ethical issues surround cloning since the beginning of the procedure. Furthermore, most of these ethical issues concern the possibility of human cloning. Human cloning involves the production of a clone from a human being. The possibility of cloning living organisms poses ethical issues due to the use and safety of the clone created from an organism. Reactions to cloning procedures vary amongst individuals; therefore, debates arise in societies due to these discrepancies due to ethical issues and personal preferences.

The discrepancies resulting from cloning procedures issues revolve around differences of views on cloning. People might have varying reasons to support or oppose cloning procedures at either a personal or communal level. Individuals might support and even undergo cloning procedures at a personal level due to setbacks such as infertility. Subsequently, an individual might undergo cloning procedures to bear a child whom they can raise as their own, thereby finding a solution to their infertility setback. Also, individuals might support cloning at a communal level due to setbacks such as hunger, famine, or the possibility of the end of biodiversity. Consistently cloning a living organism is applied to plants and animals, some of which might be edible or produce products used as food; excellent examples include goats and cattle. They’re a source of food, which is essential when communities are faced with famine and hunger. In addition, communities might support cloning to preserve biodiversity by preventing the extinction of species.

On the other hand, the opposition to cloning procedures is rooted in ethical issues. Communities might oppose the creation of human beings through cloning due to ethical issues and religious beliefs. Ethically, human cloning might lead to the undervaluing of human beings, leading to their treatment as less than they are. Religiously, the perception of a higher being as the only creator of humans promotes the opposition to cloning. This debate illustrates that moral rules are subjective in certain circumstances.

Based on ethics, cloning procedures are approached differently. Accordingly, according to Kantian ethics, it is immoral to conduct oneself in a specific manner in pursuit of a longing (Rachels & Rachels, 2019). Therefore, Kantian ethics dictate the following of principles (“categorical imperative”) despite the longing any individual might have (Rachels & Rachels, 2019). Therefore, cloning debates oppose the procedure, making it immoral based on their standards. Thus, pursuing this procedure despite its immoral rating goes against the Kantian categorical imperatives. Subsequently, pursuing a longing following cloning procedures is unethical based on the Kantian theory. In addition, Kantian ethics calls for the respect of human beings and, therefore, requires people to behave morally towards other human beings. Thus, cloning humans will contribute to the undervaluing of human beings.

Annotated Bibliography

Hughes, S. (2015). The Cloning Controversy. Science, 349(6254), 1292-1293. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aac9095

In this article, Hughes (2015) discusses the controversies that surround cloning based on the analysis of cloning in two books; “The Recombinant University by Doogab Yi” published in 2015, and “A Biography of Paul Berg by Errol C. Friedberg” published in 2014 (P 1292). Subsequently, the analysis of these controversies is grouped under two bases: cloning procedures’ safety and side effects and their application worldwide. Accordingly, Hughes uses the two books mentioned to elaborate on the beginning of genetic engineering, including cloning and the evolution in practice until recently. In addition, Hughes discusses the setbacks of cloning procedures, such as moral and ethical issues, their application in the world, and the safety of cloning procedures. Accordingly, this article by Hughes is relevant because it indicates the beginning and evolution of genetic engineering, illustrates the moral and ethical challenges of cloning, and indicates the controversies surrounding cloning procedures’ safety and the efficiency of its applications in research. These are strong arguments that support the research on cloning and ethical issues arising from the procedure. In contrast, this article by Hughes possesses limitations that are emerging from the fact that the article is an analysis of previously published work of other writers. Therefore, the article can be considered a summary of the two books since Hughes did not conduct new research but combined the analysis of other writers. However, the arguments bear merit that is essential in the analysis of cloning and its ethical issues.

Nerlich, B., Clarke, D., & Dingwall, R. (2000). Clones and Crops: The Use of Stock Characters and Word Play in Two Debates About Bioengineering. Metaphor And Symbol, 15(4), 223-239. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327868ms1504_4

In this article, Nerlich et al. (2000) address the misconception contributing to cloning procedures’ setbacks. Nerlich et al. argue that people say “genetically modified plants are killers,” marking them as unfit for consumption due to their misconceptions, and therefore, their article seeks to clear these misconceptions by pointing out the facts (P 223). Consequently, I agree that cloning debates and setbacks associated with cloning evolve around people’s misconceptions about cloning. Their argument is essential in cloning ethical implications because most moral and ethical issues are associated with misconceptions. Therefore, this article is significant for this research because it identifies some people’s misconceptions about cloning. Furthermore, they address them directly with facts on cloning and their use of facts supported by evidence to sway people’s thinking. Also, they address all types of clones in each clarification of previous ideologies. Thus, the substantive evidence they present is essential in clearing cloning misconceptions. On the other hand, the evidence used in the article is quite dated; however, some people still share the same ideologies. Therefore, this article is significant in addressing cloning issues by providing facts that counter people’s misconceptions.

Jensen, E., & Weasel, L. (2006). Abortion rhetoric in American news coverage of the human cloning debate. New Genetics And Society, 25(3), 305-323. https://doi.org/10.1080/14636770601032940

In this article, Jensen & Weasel (2006) discuss human cloning debates as information is discussed on media platforms such as news sites. Of all the types of cloning, human cloning is associated with the most setbacks based on morality and ethics. Jensen & Weasel (2006) argue, “The press constitutes a primary forum for public discussions of scientific controversies such as human cloning” (P 305). Subsequently, I agree with their article because it analyzes the information conveyed by the media in terms of human cloning ideologies, support, and religious standards impacts on human cloning. Therefore, this article is significant because it addresses the role of the media in human cloning setbacks and people’s ideologies in different communities that contribute to the debate and controversies of cloning humans. Therefore, the article is significant in its address of the information that contributes to the debate on human cloning ethical issues, contributing to the cloning research. On the other hand, this article focuses primarily on the role of the media in creating various ideologies, while the creation of ideologies depends on various factors. However, the methodology and results of the article are significant in addressing the research of ethical issues of the cloning of humans.

Häyry, M. (2018). Ethics and cloning. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1093/bmb/ldy031.  

In this article, Häyry (2018) illustrates the ethical issue surrounding cloning and the controversies arising from differing ideologies on cloning. The possibility of cloning humans using genetic engineering techniques is at the core of the discrepancies between individuals. Häyry argues that the reasons for the lack of support for human cloning have been similar since the discrepancies began. In addition, Häyry says, “At some point, scientists in some laboratory will allow human clones to develop beyond the regulated 14 days, report it, and the news will stir a renewed confrontation” (P 6). Consequently, once they have possible responses supported by evidence, there is a chance that the cloning of humans will commence creating alternative options in therapeutics. Therefore, I agree with this article on the significance of cloning research because it provides the ethical issues associated with the cloning of humans; it points out the areas of concurrence and the importance of the cloning of humans. On the other hand, this article’s limitation is that the cloning of an entire human body is still a theory; thus, the article can consider their perceptions of the ideologies on the cloning of humans, which is not supported by evidence on the same. However, the article is very educational and significant in the ethical issues of cloning.

Vajta, G. (2018). Cloning: A Sleeping Beauty Awaiting the Kiss? Cellular Reprogramming, 20(3), 145-156. https://doi.org/10.1089/cell.2017.0058

In this article, Vajta (2018) illustrates that misconceptions contribute to the stagnation of the cloning procedure. Vajta says, “Misunderstandings and baseless accusations alongside with unsupported fears and administrative barriers hampered cloners to overcome the initial challenging period with obvious difficulties that are common features of a radically new approach” (P 145). Also, Vajta illustrates the process of cell engineering, which results in the manipulation of cells. This illustration is necessary for clearing the misconceptions that surround cloning, contributing to the stagnation. Further, Vatja proposes various approaches that can sway people’s thinking from opposing to supporting cloning procedures to restore progression in research. Therefore, this article is significant in the ethical issues surrounding cloning because it discusses the misconceptions, illustrates the cloning procedure, addresses the safety and application issues, and provides potential persuasive approaches that can be applied to sway people into supporting cloning procedures. Therefore, this article is significant because it addresses all the setbacks of cloning and postulates potential solutions to these setbacks. Accordingly, I agree that understanding a person’s perception that challenges cloning provides an evident path to providing a solution to a misconception or a fear. The detail of the article is, therefore, significant in the research because it establishes a basis for solutions to the setbacks of cloning and elaborates potential methods that might be significant in the prevention of ethical and moral issues.

References

Häyry, M. (2018). Ethics and cloning. Retrieved 6 August 2021, from https://doi.org/10.1093/bmb/ldy031.

Jensen, E., & Weasel, L. (2006). Abortion rhetoric in American news coverage of the human cloning debate. New Genetics And Society, 25(3), 305-323. https://doi.org/10.1080/14636770601032940

Nerlich, B., Clarke, D., & Dingwall, R. (2000). Clones and Crops: The Use of Stock Characters and Word Play in Two Debates About Bioengineering. Metaphor And Symbol, 15(4), 223-239. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327868ms1504_4

Rachels, S., & Rachels, J. The elements of moral philosophy (9th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.

Vajta, G. (2018). Cloning: A Sleeping Beauty Awaiting the Kiss?. Cellular Reprogramming, 20(3), 145-156. https://doi.org/10.1089/cell.2017.0058

ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE

We’ll write everything from scratch

---

Read/review the following resources for this activity:

• Textbook: Chapters 9, 10
• Lesson
• Minimum of 5 scholarly sources (in addition to the textbook)

Instructions
First, return to the topic chosen for the week three assignment.

Answer this question: What are the personal and/or communal ethical factors that may be involved in determining the moral position of either side in that debate?

Next, articulate and then evaluate the ethical positions  using Kantian ethics (that is, the categorical imperative) relative to the long standing debate (that is your topic chosen in the week three assignment).

Finally, create a complete annotated bibliography for 5 academic scholarly sources. You will annotate each source. The sources should be relevant to the topic chosen for the week three assignment.

Include the following:

Publication details

Annotation (a detailed reading of the source)

Each annotation section should include the following:

Summarize key points and identify key terms (using quotation marks and citing a page in parentheses).

Describe the controversies or “problems” raised by the articles.

State whether you agree or disagree and give reasons.

Locate one or two quotations to be used in the final research project.

Evaluate the ways in which this article is important and has helped you focus your understanding.