• Cloning has been used for many years.
  • And for them to have a clone baby this is not a play.
  • Reproductive cloning is the cloning of a human being.

Reportedly, a human embryo was cloned and lived in the uterus of a pig for 32 days before being terminated.

It is utterly wrong to clone any animal or human for any reason.

Human cloning has many possible benefits, but it comes with concerns.

The science comes in different forms the two major being cloning and genetic reconstruction.
* Food in our supermarkets is healthier now than 30 years ago. * Organic food is not worth paying extra for. * Obesity is more of a risk to life than food poisoning. * The human version of mad cow disease will claim no more than 200 lives in Britain.

Legalizing cloning in humans will save large amounts of lives.

The type of cloning people seem to be against is cloning for its own sake.
These benefits come in the form of medical advances like, the use of cloned human embryos in research into genetics and genetically related diseases, and their treatments or preventions ("Ethical").

 

There are many incorrect ideas of what human cloning is.

But on the other hand, cloning special people like Einstein can be very useful for mankind.
Cloning is a highly controversial subject and comes at a very high ethical price of messing with genetic life for the purpose of creating it, or destroying it....

Human cloning was finally created, and everyone who wanted a clone of themselves bought one.
Research for human cloning has been banned by law for several years already by many European countries including Germany and Denmark.

Even President Clinton has an ethical position with regards to human cloning: “My own view is that human cloning would have to raise deep concerns, given our most cherished concepts of faith and humanity.


After all, would the benefits of cloning not benefit only the rich?

The cloning of human tissue should be allowed because the fields of medicine benefit from it; however, the full cloning of humans is a mockery of life because it creates a population of people who will not evolve or adapt to changes in the environment.

People may think of cloning rabbits, sheep or humans.

Each human life is unique, born of a miracle that reaches beyond laboratory science.” President Clinton has placed a moratorium on all federally funded research into human cloning until such a time that a special committee can report back with the moral answers to this issue.

Cloning technology could be used ..

In a society where the people are their own gods there are no restraints, only temporary inhibitions until the initial shock wears off.

Accordingly, successful human cloning from an adult cell source is only a matter of time.

Cloning for medicine: the miracle that ..

Does that mean there's nothing to choose between different kinds of agriculture when it comes to sustainable planetary welfare? Certainly not. Some are much more damaging than others, but it's no use appealing to 'nature', or to 'instinct' in order to decide which ones. You have to study the evidence, soberly and reasonably - scientifically. Slashing and burning (incidentally, no agricultural system is closer to being 'traditional') destroys our ancient forests. Overgrazing (again, widely practised by 'traditional' cultures) causes soil erosion and turns fertile pasture into desert. Moving to our own modern tribe, monoculture, fed by powdered fertilisers and poisons, is bad for the future; indiscriminate use of antibiotics to promote livestock growth is worse.

which human cloning is expected to benefit mankind

No wonder T.H. Huxley, Darwin's bulldog, founded his ethics on a repudiation of Darwinism. Not a repudiation of Darwinism as science, of course, for you cannot repudiate truth. But the very fact that Darwinism is true makes it even more important for us to fight against the naturally selfish and exploitative tendencies of nature. We can do it. Probably no other species of animal or plant can. We can do it because our brains (admittedly given to us by natural selection for reasons of short-term Darwinian gain) are big enough to see into the future and plot long-term consequences. Natural selection is like a robot that can only climb uphill, even if this leaves it stuck on top of a measly hillock. There is no mechanism for going downhill, for crossing the valley to the lower slopes of the high mountain on the other side. There is no natural foresight, no mechanism for warning that present selfish gains are leading to species extinction – and indeed, 99 per cent of all species that have ever lived are extinct.