This topic of human cloning is one of the most interesting and controversial subjects to discuss. Part of the reason it is so interesting is because it’s not just science fiction stories anymore; scientists are actually doing these things right now. Having these fascinating abilities occur now creates more dilemmas and debate for the people who want to pursue and push the barrier of life and those of us whom disagree and believe that life should be left alone. I believe the ability to manipulate life in such a manner is fascinating and bewildering that we could even accomplish such a task. I have always loved science fiction stories that really delve into the amazing ideas and concepts people come up with which is why topics like these always fascinate me. There are many viewpoints on this matter and many of them make sense when you think about it, and thinking about this fully is the important thing if people are to decide for themselves if human cloning is a good or bad thing.
There are many sides to the debate about whether human cloning is a good thing or not and if it should be allowed. In the Why Not Clone a Human? Ethical Challenges of Biotechnology video, its point was that the human race has been evolving for generations, and as our technology grows, the people should grow as well. One argument from this video was that, while there are unforeseen consequences in perusing such incredible feats, if we didn’t push forward, humans would never get anything done. The videos point was that we can’t live a life in fear. Another point this video made was that a reason people are so afraid of technology like this, that allows human cloning, is due to science fiction horror movies. The people in the video state that human cloning would not be like that at all, that human clones would be ordinary, normal looking people, closely resembling that of an identical twin. The video The Ethics of Biotechnology gives insight into the fact that by perusing technologies like this, we will finally obtain long awaited answers to questions asked generations ago and today. The video said humans would be limitless in what they could do and are now only held back by those who are fearful of misuse and old traditional moral judgements. They said they want to do good and make humans better. An argument for them was that they could create bacteria that could be used to make antibiotic drugs as well as organs to save lives. The Dawn of de-extinction. Are you ready? video was very interesting. It maintained that with technologies that help genetic cloning, animals that have been long extinct could be brought back. This video said it was our obligation to bring back species that have gone extinct due to human interference. The Tissue Engineering: Custom-Made Organs on Demand video was especially eye-opening. This video pushed the idea that because the technology is here, we can save lives by creating human replacement body parts, like internal organs that will help people live when their organs fail. The people in this video maintained how important it was for people to have affordable care and prolong their lives through growing biogenetic organs. All these videos were very persuasive in trying to push the idea that genetic engineering, thus human cloning will be a good thing for us. The video I would have to say was the most persuasive would be the Tissue Engineering: Custom-Made Organs on Demand video. It was most persuasive to me because it showed that the science already exists and is useful to saving human lives; this video was direct and to the point.
After watching the videos, though understanding more about the good things about bioengineering and human cloning, my viewpoint has still not changed. Although I can appreciate the tremendous achievement in discovering this ability, I’m not sure if it is at all right. I am not saying that it is all wrong, however, I do believe there is a line to be drawn as to not doom our humanity and existence. As far as allowing society to allow cloning research, that is a tricky question. In order to accurately research and discover if something is viable, one must do questionable things in order for it to be proven. Research is not just reading a textbook, because human cloning has not been done yet, so no one can just read about it. One would have to play Doctor Victor Frankenstein in order for accurate research to ensue and most people know what happened in that story. Bad things happen when mere humans try to mess with things they don’t understand. It’s one thing to wonder about and try to understand something, but if you are doing questionable acts in order to figure it out, that may not be a great idea. The ends don’t justify the means. It’s difficult for myself to make an exact answer of what I think or believe, especially because I do see the benefits of bioengineering. In that case, I would say that perhaps, under strict rules, there could be acceptable under certain conditions. The problem is, who makes the rules, who draws the line to say what would be going too far? I do like the fact that we are able to grow organs that can save one’s life, but if it ever comes to saving a life at the expense of another or even the expense of your humanity and soul, then what? In the video, The Ethics of Biotechnology, one lady said that if we could stop or prevent disease, then why shouldn’t we? It’s a reasonable question, and easily answered that there is no reason… except if you really think about it, how far would one go to do it? Watch this video from Doctor Who.
Who will be the one that decides what is too far and what is reasonable to save our own kind? The Dawn of de-extinction. Are you ready? video tried to suggest that because of the technology we possess, we could bring back the extinct animals; that it’s our duty. Perhaps it’s only our duty because we messed up in the past by misusing the land and hunting the animals. In Star Trek, it’s based in the future, and there was a situation where and alien probe came looking for their… we’ll call them intelligent counterparts from across space, (because I’m not going to describe the whole plot) the only problem was that the ones they were looking for, the Humpback Whales, were extinct due to the brutal hunting in the past. The people in the future suffered because the people in the past did not think ahead of dire consequences of their actions. So yes, it seems it would be the right thing to manipulate DNA in order to bring back what we destroyed, or perhaps this is the perfect lesson for us humans not to be hasty and reckless in all of our endeavors. Not to mention what happened in Jurassic Park, trying to bring back the dinosaurs, look how that turned out. In the Why Not Clone a Human? Ethical Challenges of Biotechnology video, someone did say that the way science fiction movies interpret science is not a real representation of what their trying to do and that those just scare people for no reason. I would have to disagree. Movies and shows, especially science fiction are meant to tell stories of the human condition, especially the human condition when people mess with things beyond their understanding. Whether or not these are accurate portrayals of things that could actually happen, there is no denying that it is possible. Everyone says that the technology exists. Not only that but there are people who would want to push the barriers just because they can. Just because you can do something, doesn’t mean you should. Science fiction stories are here to remind us what could happen because of human greed and misunderstandings. Stories are lessons of the future because of what has happened in the past. The line of acceptability is a tricky thing because everyone wants a different thing. If you are using this advancement for just saving lives and not creating them, then perhaps that is as far as it should go. Going beyond that goes into more areas of debate, such as if you are creating life, does that life has a soul? What will be the unforeseen consequences of trying to play God?