An Insane Idea Of The Cloning Of Human Essay Example

their own gods but being your own god does not mean that you have control of everything around you, human cloning is likely to end badly in the fact that it is a big risk to the future of human beings, clones might replace human beings in the future.

Altering human genes is a big risk and can turn dangerous in the future. This is because if the procedures and knowledge of cloning falls into the wrong hands, it stands a big chance of being used negatively to the negative effect of human beings. Let’s think of an individual who has the idea of replacing humans with clones, he might decide to end the existing human era at once and replace it with clones. According to Frankenstein (34) he had tried to create an organism and due to the curiousness in his work, he did not involve himself in questioning himself of the consequences of his work. In the same way, in today’s world, Scientists are curious and have become ambitious, everyday they try to come up with cons with different power, height and intelligence. This is done just to impress their scientific ambitions but they don’t imagine of what would happen if they come up with a species more intelligent than humans, too powerful beyond control by human beings.

The outcome of such a creature might wipe the human era out of existence. Cloning is replacing natural births as women are not ready to carry the burden of a child for months, some women don’t want to look or get viewed as worn out but always live like young girls. The egg and the sperm cell

of two individuals are cleared first then genetic materials replace the older material. An embryo develops from these two materials but there is one problem to the child “to be born” it means that the genes in the child are not similar to that of neither the father nor the mother. This affects a family socially because a child is brought up with the fact that the child is the mother’s genetic sister and the father’s genetic brother. This issue of cloning children is likely to affect a child socially and psychologically if in hisher mature days he realizes what his history and source of existence was (Harris & John 345)

The idea of making a clown is no bigger issue than raising the clown. A mother living the guilt that she is not responsible for a one hundred percent responsibility of the child`s genes. It is said that an individual can never run away from the truth about something that involves himher. Child clowning reduces the mother to child relationship in that a mother who gave birth to a child naturally knows how much it took her to get the child but to a woman who only underwent a simple child cloning procedure does not see and feels the same bond to her child. According to a past research and experiment which involved the raising of a clown fish which was past metamorphosis, it was realized that it is very hard and costly to raise this organism made from human effort because it could not survive the normal conditions of a fish. Many conditions had to be provided in raising the fish like light in

continuous supply, air supply which is very expensive to manage.

When it comes to the life of a clown, many human beings view it that because they are responsible for cloning, they can take the life of a clown under any condition. With the fact that human beings are turning themselves into gods just because they can now give life just as God did to them, they can also take a life they are responsible for (Lawton 191). One thing that human beings should understand is that life begins at conception and clowns carry the genes of human so immediately the process of making them starts, life is already vested in them, either though an intentional killing or accidental death of a clown then that’s an inhuman act because it simply translates to killing a human being like any other.

The life span of a clone is not always expected to be that of a human child. This clone is considered a small ideal and has less effect and its chances of surviving are low. (Lawton 33). Human beings are not perfect and creating a clone that can last for years is a problem which is a major difference between them and God. The life of a clone could end so suddenly and at any unpredicted time. The sudden death of a clown can be due to mistakes which were done during its creation because human beings themselves are not perfect and that they don’t put in too much concentration when making the clones. Human beings can never be like God, it’s hard for them to come up with an organism that has a one hundred percent

functioning like normal human beings. Clones are mainly brought into existence for experimentation. Once scientists fail or complicate the making of a clone, they always think of creating another clown and this creates a series of clones that are brought to existence for a short period of time. The reason why clones are made to last for a short period of time is the fact that they are only intended for research to finally come to a conclusion of making a perfect clone. Due to the continuous failure in making a perfect clone, the life of clones has continued to be short (Valenzuela 107)

As argued by Lawton (25) Human beings deciding to resume the role of God in deciding who lives and who doesn’t live can never be a success to the human history and life. This is because when we view the roles played by God and the value of him being supernatural is far much distant from getting a comparison with mankind. Mankind is full of ambition, desire to explore and the nature of feeling that they control everything which simply explains how desperate mankind is towards living a life controlled by them. Human kind stands at a high risk, a condition where they have been placed by their own deeds. Cloning is likely to put humans in a pit which they will never drag themselves out from. If the technology of cloning falls in the wrong hands, wrong in the situation that its control gets in the wrong hands, then mankind will stand as a threatened species of his own world and by his own actions (Valenzuela 109) Terrorist groups are one

of the worst groups who should never get access to the cloning; they might use this as a way of hitting back to the society and eventually get control over human life.

The worst and most dangerous things that human beings can be left to do is having the advantage or responsibility to decide who lives and who dies? This idea of making clones and sometimes eventually killing them exposes human beings to the trait of getting used to killing. From this trait of killing clones, human beings end up forgetting the virtues or the culture which holds respect for human life. Whenever an individual feels like taking the life of another it feels so simple because it’s not anything new to what he is used to (Valenzuela 111) This lack of respect for human life can eventually lead to a world war which is based on massive destruction of both human life and property.

In conclusion, basing evidence from the ideas given by David Newton in Frankenstein cloning and the ethics of human closing, I can confidently say that human beings will never play God and they will never control human life. If there is to be someone else to play the role of God, then may be someone else but not human beings. Technology has blinded human beings in a way that they only think of bringing into existence what they feel should be existing and eliminate what they feel is not worthy living (Valenzuela 105). I don’t deny the fact that human beings were vested with knowledge to come up with ideas and new inventions that will help them live a better life but

there is a problem to that, they are coming up with inventions which makes them pose danger to themselves. Human beings should let God keep his supernatural nature and stop competing with him over control of what even the humans trust it comes from him. Technology, if not well dealt with might put human beings into a road without turning back which leaves us with no idea of the future since it seems so unpredictable.

Work cited

1. Harris, John. "" Goodbye Dolly?" The ethics of human cloning." Journal of Medical Ethics 23.6 (1997): 353-360.
2. Jaenisch, Rudolf. "Human cloning—the science and ethics of nuclear transplantation." N Engl J Med 351.27 (2004): 2787-91.
3. Lawton, Anne. "Frankenstein Controversy: The Constitutionality of a Federal Ban on Cloning, The." Ky. LJ 87 (1998): 277.
4. Robertson, John A. "Liberty, identity, and human cloning." Tex. L. Rev. 76 (1997): 1371.
5. Valenzuela, C. Y. "Scientific ethics of human cloning." Revista medica de Chile 133.1 (2005): 105-112.