Post #11: Cloning

Discuss the science of cloning, its uses, and the ethical and religious considerations of it as presented in the articles assigned.

The Process
Cloning became an issue that the world would have to debate with the introduction of “Dolly,’ the first fully grown mammal to be cloned.” “Dolly” became the agent in which human cloning would be thought possible. “Her birth shocked the scientific community and spurred discussion about the possibility of human clones.” On one side of the debate scientists were excited about the possibility of cloning humans. They are optimistic about cloning because human cloning “would enable doctors to determine the cause of spontaneous abortions, give oncologists an understanding of the rapid cell growth of cancer, allow the use of stem cells to regenerate tissues, and advance work on aging, genetics, and medicines.” On the other side of the debate scientists were adamant against the possibility of cloning. They are fearful about human cloning because it “would result in a high number of miscarriages and deaths among newborns” and a successful human clone “could change family dynamics in profound and unpredictable ways.” Also, scientists were worried that there would be “a black market for embryos” and “infertile couples” would turn to these black markets for help.

“Dolly” was cloned using “the cloning technique somatic cell nuclear transfer.” This would be the technique used if scientists were to clone a human. The technique would entail that “a cell is taken from a donor woman” and “an unfertilized egg is taken from a second woman.” Next, scientists would then remove the “DNA from the cell” of the donor woman and transfer it to the egg to the second woman. Then “the egg is implanted into a surrogate mother.” Finally, the surrogate mother would give birth to a baby that “is genetically identical to the original donor.” The clone would actually be “a time-delayed identical twin” of the original donor that is much younger than the original donor. General concerns about such a procedure are that if “it took more than 227 attempts before ‘Dolly’ was created as a health viable lamb,” the fear is that it would take much more attempts to clone a human.

The Religious Debate
Roman Catholic: The Church believes that all of humankind was created in the image of God and that humanity was given dominion over the world by God. Human cloning is contrary to the “creation story,” thereby, making human cloning “intrinsically evil’ and could never be justified.” The Church believes that human cloning violates the “sanctity of life.” They view human cloning as “immoral means” to unjustifiable “just ends.”

Judaism:
Due to the genetic predisposition Jews have towards Tay Sachs, Judaism thinks “cloning humans could conceivably be justified in some circumstances, however few they may be.” Although Judaism “emphasizes that man is in partnership with God,” they “do not believe that potential violations of human dignity are reason enough to prohibit human cloning.” To the Jews, there are more pros than cons in human cloning. Their main concern is that cloning “might harm the family by changing the roles and relationships between family members.”

Protestantism: Protestants view themselves as “co-creators who have a responsibility to ‘participate with God in shaping a better future,” therefore, “man should not allow human cloning because it violates God’s intentions by allow man to reproduce with a sexual partner.

Islam: Islam is split into two camps, those who think human cloning should be allowed because “there should be ‘no limits on research because knowledge is bestowed on us by God” and those who think human cloning should not be allowed because it “could affect kinship, which is the key concept of Islamic law.” This would, in turn, create “children who lack either a mother or a father. This would be inimical to Islamic society.”

The Ethical Debate
“Possibility of Physical Harm to the Embryo”: Those opposed to human cloning say that the technology currently available is not considered to be safe for human cloning. Those for human cloning say that with a considerable amount of experimentation on mammals, room for error can be reduced to the equivalency of “miscarriage or infant death.”

“Possible Psychological Harms to the Child”: Those opposed to human cloning say that a cloned human child would “suffer from a diminished sense of individuality and personal autonomy” and be fearful of his future because of “the life path of their gene donor.” Those for human cloning say that the cloned human child will benefit from knowing their strengths and weaknesses.

“Possible Degradation of the Quality of Parenting and Family Life”: Those opposed to human cloning say that “cloning encourages parents to value their children according to how well they meet expectations instead of loving them for their own sake.” Those for human cloning say that cloning will benefit infertile couples who are unable to have children naturally and that said children will be “loved unconditionally” by their parents.

“Possible Objectification of Children”: Those opposed to human cloning say that make children objects of possession rather than a gift from God. Those for human cloning say that the law would prevent any such action.

“Possible Social Harms”: Those opposed to human cloning say that this will be the beginning of designer babies. Those for human cloning say that the “potential benefits to society of cloning people such as scientists and intellectuals would outweigh potential harms.”

“The Use of Scarce Resources”: Those opposed to human cloning say that the cells of humans are to be considered “scarce resources.” Those for human cloning say that the “research into cloning might provide medical insight that could benefit larger society.”