Animal cloning is a controversial issue in more than one way. While there are multiple aspects to each view, I believe it comes down to two main categories: food and science. The original goal of cloning was for scientific medical purposes only, not for food. Sadly however, the business world of farming has begun a drastic change. Greedy manufactures have pushed aside all ethical consequences and have decided upon the “get rich quick” scheme of cloning for food. Another push for cloning is to save endangered species. Where that is better than large companies just trying to make a higher income, does that mean it makes cloning any more acceptable?
In today’s business world of farming, change is almost inevitable. But that does not mean the farmers are accepting of that change. Farmers make deals with giant corporations that “own” them in a sense, pushing them to their limits. A major limit was when the corporations demanded for their farms to produce genetically modified animals. The pushing has not stopped however; the question of cloning has arisen. Luckily it has not reached as far as GMO’s have, an example being the chicken. Who is now twice the size and grows in half the time. An argument would be that GMO’s are intrinsically wrong, so how could cloning possibly be alright? One might say you genetically modify the animal to be bigger in a shorter time and another you grow the animal in a petri dish. If a person is not okay with genetically modifying then chances are they would not approve of cloning either and vice versa. A grocery store may be selling the cloned products of an original animal that died many years before and to me, that is a disturbing thought. Giant corporations see cloning as a way to feed the growing population, but though there is starvation, the reason is not that there is a shortage of food. The world actually produces enough food to feed everyone, but it is not distributed in a fashion to end hunger. Therefore the giant corporations’ argument of feeding the growing population is invalid.
Another argument for cloning would be to help endangered species. Helping species survive longer than was originally intended to, is a wonderful thing. If somehow woolly mammoths still existed to this day, that would be amazing, sadly though that would involve playing God. Saving endangered species would be fantastic, but one cannot simply push aside the ethical perspective of it. Some would argue that it would consist of playing creator instead of creature, and that cannot be ignored. Humans are supposed to do well in the world, help each other, save the environment, create word peace, and so on and so forth. Those are all great ideas to shoot for, but in reality they are not reached. Extinction of species is not a new issue. It has been going on throughout history, and cloning should not just give the right to change it.
Dolly the sheep, the first ever successfully cloned animal. She was in every newspaper during the 90’s. People were amazed at the science behind her. Being as interested as most were, they could not see past the hype. Dolly took over one-hundred times to actually work, had many health problems and she had a shorter life span than the average sheep. Granted that was then and this is now. Scientific advances have increased drastically, and the obvious health risks have decreased.
Cloning is ethically and morally sound when it comes into play for medical advances. It helps people who have life threatening diseases and others who have complicated medical issues. Medical research helps save lives; it is a good cause and purpose. Cloning animals for food just makes it an easier process to slaughter the bigger and better. It holds no greater good for society; it holds too many concerns which make it not worth the hassle. Cloning of animals for food should not be allowed or accepted in today’s society, but when it comes to cloning for medical purposes, I see no problem.
In today’s business world of farming, change is almost inevitable. But that does not mean the farmers are accepting of that change. Farmers make deals with giant corporations that “own” them in a sense, pushing them to their limits. A major limit was when the corporations demanded for their farms to produce genetically modified animals. The pushing has not stopped however; the question of cloning has arisen. Luckily it has not reached as far as GMO’s have, an example being the chicken. Who is now twice the size and grows in half the time. An argument would be that GMO’s are intrinsically wrong, so how could cloning possibly be alright? One might say you genetically modify the animal to be bigger in a shorter time and another you grow the animal in a petri dish. If a person is not okay with genetically modifying then chances are they would not approve of cloning either and vice versa. A grocery store may be selling the cloned products of an original animal that died many years before and to me, that is a disturbing thought. Giant corporations see cloning as a way to feed the growing population, but though there is starvation, the reason is not that there is a shortage of food. The world actually produces enough food to feed everyone, but it is not distributed in a fashion to end hunger. Therefore the giant corporations’ argument of feeding the growing population is invalid.
Another argument for cloning would be to help endangered species. Helping species survive longer than was originally intended to, is a wonderful thing. If somehow woolly mammoths still existed to this day, that would be amazing, sadly though that would involve playing God. Saving endangered species would be fantastic, but one cannot simply push aside the ethical perspective of it. Some would argue that it would consist of playing creator instead of creature, and that cannot be ignored. Humans are supposed to do well in the world, help each other, save the environment, create word peace, and so on and so forth. Those are all great ideas to shoot for, but in reality they are not reached. Extinction of species is not a new issue. It has been going on throughout history, and cloning should not just give the right to change it.
Dolly the sheep, the first ever successfully cloned animal. She was in every newspaper during the 90’s. People were amazed at the science behind her. Being as interested as most were, they could not see past the hype. Dolly took over one-hundred times to actually work, had many health problems and she had a shorter life span than the average sheep. Granted that was then and this is now. Scientific advances have increased drastically, and the obvious health risks have decreased.
Cloning is ethically and morally sound when it comes into play for medical advances. It helps people who have life threatening diseases and others who have complicated medical issues. Medical research helps save lives; it is a good cause and purpose. Cloning animals for food just makes it an easier process to slaughter the bigger and better. It holds no greater good for society; it holds too many concerns which make it not worth the hassle. Cloning of animals for food should not be allowed or accepted in today’s society, but when it comes to cloning for medical purposes, I see no problem.