Life in the Shadow A Article

Question: Describe about the Life in the Shadow for A Article. Answer: Tremendous changes in technology have brought ways of doing things. The reproduction of human beings has evolved especially after of clones. Clones are copies of people with the same genetic composition. Cloning was done successfully in sheep (Dr. Wilmut 1997). Successful cloning was after that established in human and was successful. It gave identical copies to the original people. This Act was very controversial as people argued whether it was wrong or right to do cloning of human being. Later the cloning was abolished in many countries as it was seen unethical and with man problems. Life in the shadow was an argument that exposed the effects of human cloning. Firstly, that cloning provided the clones no choice but to live the lives of the original copies. If the original copies lived a life full of problems and not very good, the clones had no option but to have same life or not have any life at all. Secondly, the argument suggested that clones but put up for adoption to avoid knowledge of the original copy to the human parents of the clone. These both arguments are confusing. It doesn't make any sense to have a clone and place it for adoption never to see it again. Were it not for the genes of the original copy the clone could not exist and therefore, the life of the clone depends on the original and should be appreciated no matter the case. It is evident nothing that cloning of human beings is important in several ways. An infertile couple can use cloning to have babies which they are related to them genetically. These will help the couple avoid marriages problems caused by lack of children. Technology has led to the emergence of gays and lesbians' marriages and therefore, if the couples want children they may use cloning to get children they are somehow related genetically, and this reduces loneliness among the couples. Marriages were one of the couples has a hereditary disease the cloning can help the couple get children who are not sick with the disease. Cloning can be lifesaving as it may provide organs for transplant. These acts as a transplant donor insurance. The patients can get the body parts from the clones since they are genetically identical. The organs can be the heart, eyes, lungs, etc. (Kahn 1989). The death of loved ones I very painful and therefore cloning may help the family get a copy of the dead pers on, and this can console the family. The family can have a company of the same copy of the deceased, and they may never feel the loss. Great people can be cloned to provide their copies to ensure their character traits are expanded and used within a wide range. Doing cloning is a great achievement has it shows the development of the scientific knowledge, and this is a good gesture of what innovations may arise in the future. These demonstrate the possibility of increase medical welfare where all diseases will have a cure. Cloning has many challenges despite the advantages people perceive in the modern world. Cloning of genius and talented people is good, but there is no assurance that the cloned person will have the same attributes. The clones are entirely different from the original copies. (Thomas 1994). Cloning people for scientific knowledge is unethical. Clones cannot be human subjects of research. These very wrong as they grow with no consent on the behavior and character trait. Reproduction freedom is paramount to ensure that the children born free to control what happens in their lives but not to be tied to actions of another person (Walter 1982). People also have a right to live not to be exploited, imagine people or government made copies of a person with limited abilities they may end up using them as slaves (Huxley 1932). Also, clones of evil leaders like Hitler would make the world very peaceful place. Cloning exposes the clones to psychological distress. The parents of the clones expect them to behave like the original copies and this may not be the case. Problems may arise as the clones have pressure to accomplish what is by the original copies (Rainer 1978). Cloning in animals is efficient and safe but I don't this can be done to the human. The man is prone to error and tenancy to find more. The risk to clones can arise where the experts use them as subjects of research not knowing that they are human beings and deserve better lives just as the other people (Pollack 1993). Human life is sacred and unique; the emergence of clones may render human life useless as people can have a replacement. The clones can be used as substitutes if the original copy has problems. The government may kill vocal individuals who bring problems and create identical copies which they can manipulate to their desires. Since the human life through cloning loses value, individuals, and the government may spend more resources in cloning and neglect the critical and social need of the people in the society. These can lead to poor living standards and underdevelopment of countries. (labor 1984 Callahan 1993). The world is full of business persons who use every opportunity to create a market with the aim of making more profits. In the modern society, cloning is for commercial gains, and this may degrade the activity. People and organization may use the activity for financial gain. The business world there is a bargain, and we know that the best quality products are costly. Although the costly are the best as the customer, you can get goods and services according to your pocket size. When cloning becomes a business, this may mean that the quality of clones may is small, this can create a great danger to the clones (Turner 1981). Programs of eugenicists like Herman Mueller earlier in the century to impregnate thousands of women with the sperm of extraordinary men, as well as the more recent establishment of sperm banks of Nobel laureates, have met with little or no public interest or success (Adams 1990). People prefer sexual means of reproduction, and they prefer to keep their biological ties to their offspring. Clones are not allowed to growth freely as their strings attached to them. The expectations that the clones with being like the original copy both regarding appearance and behavior. In the modern society there are many vices, and therefore, the clones can be used to commit fraud or criminal activities. Making a copy of a famous person without their consent, for example, a leader may be used to tarnish his name or do a criminal activity with his copy. The clone will be utilized as toys and manipulated as to the people's desire. The act of using the clones as sources of body parts for human transplant is using them as spare parts, and this is immoral since they are people just as us with brain and heart. Cloning dead people may traumatize the people. Imagine seeing your dead friend or wife again, and you surely buried the person. These very horrifying to the public. Clones and the original copies may have conflicts. Clones look similar and with almost same behaviors as the original, an d this may bring competition. Twins born may not look similar but almost end up competing as it is human nature to feel superior to the other and this may cause high dangers. People tend to treat clones as not human which is very wrong, before the abolishment of cloning, clones were locked up to be used as spare parts to the original copies, and this was inhuman. In the case of any disappearance, are killed after being found. Despite the abolishment of cloning am sure it has not been done completely as secretive cloning takes place where influential people try to make their copies to live long. Humanity is if full of wickedness and people always tend to love the prohibited things. It is right that cloning is a great achievement to the world of modern science but the problems it can cause to the world are a lot. Limitation of cloning is necessary to prevent the streets being full of the similar person, and the ability to differentiate would be impossible. Countries can clone more sol diers, and the ruthless leader may clone their copies to use for body transplant not to ever die. It would be catastrophic. Cloning is a great thing but threatens the race of humankind. Through it, the people may be extinct. Imagine the world in which anyone has a copy of himself or herself. The clones and the original copies may engage in the war of superiority. These may be a battle of fighting our shadows. It is unknown how the clone may turn up to be regarding behavior as not all the time they are similar to the original clones. Scientists may create monsters not knowing, and this can be a great tragedy to the world. Human beings are not subjects to experiments as life is paramount. Clones of animals are enough, and scientist must be satisfied with that. Everything scientifically modified has effects and therefore the clones might have significant effects which can be very dangerous. Also, human cloning would result in persons' worth or value seeming diminished because we would now see people as able to be manufactured or "handmade." This creation of human life would reduce o ur appreciation and awe of it and its natural production. It would be a mistake, however, to conclude that a human being created by human cloning is of less value or is less worthy of respect than one produced by sexual reproduction. The argument life in the shadow is morally decisive as it tries to point out the reasons against cloning. The case gives the basis of seeing what reproductive human cloning is despite the fact that it is not in depth to give room for the conclusion that it is wrong completely. Truly, human reproductive cloning is necessary but also has many problems that it is likely to create in future. It should be therefore observing critically to see whether to be allowed in future or not. I strongly disagree its allowance in future as a human being don't follow the rules and regulations laid down. People are primitive and despites steps put for executing cloning they may end up not following them. It is better to prevent something than to cure as the repercussion may be great and far reaching. Sometimes the cure is never found for some incidence and therefore prevention is the best mechanism to be undertaken in the case of the cloning issues. It is both immoral and has many unethical matters that reduce the human dignity. Life should be treated with care and respected by all people for better future. Due to most moral reasons against doing human cloning remain speculative, they seem insufficient to warrant at this time a complete legal prohibition of either research o n or later use of human cloning. Legitimate moral concerns about the use and effects of human cloning, however, underline the need for careful public oversight of research on its development, together with a broader audience debate and review before cloning is done on human beings. Cloning should be a campaign against and live seen as complete with no amendments ready to be done with it. Scientists should involve themselves in research to improve the living standards of people not trying to make copies of them. Human beings are not like movies or songs to be controlled and reproduced at anyone's discretion for personal benefit. Life should be valued and taken seriously, and all the people should strive to keep it pure without blemish. References Nelkin, D. And Lindee, M.S., 1995.The DNA mystique: the gene as cultural icon. WH Freeman and Co. Brock, D.W., The non-identity problem and genetic harm, Bioethics, 9:269-275, 1995. , Reproductive freedom: Its nature, bases and limits, in Health Care Ethics: Critical Issues for Health Professionals, D. Thomasma, J. Monagle (eds.), Gaithersburg, MD: Aspen Publishers, 1994. Callahan, D., Perspective on cloning: A threat to individual uniqueness, Los Angeles Times, November 12, 1993, B7. Cohen, J., G. Tomkin, The science fiction, and reality of embryo cloning. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal, 4:193-204, 1994. Council of Europe, Recommendation 1046 (1986) on the Use of Human Embryos and Fetuses Fletcher, J., The Ethics of Genetic Control: Ending Reproductive Roulette, Garden City, NY: Anchor Books, 1974. Huxley, A., Brave New World, London: Chalto and Winders, 1932. Jonas, H., Philosophical Essays: From Ancient Creed to Technological Man, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1974. Kahn, C., Can we achieve immortality?, Free Inquiry, 9:14-18, 1989. Labar, M., The pros and cons of human cloning, Thought, 57:318-333, 1984. Pollack, R., Beyond cloning, New York Times, Nov. 17, 1993, A27. Rainer, J.D. Commentary, Man and Medicine: The Journal of Values and Ethics in Health Care, 3:115-117, 1978. Ramsey, P., Fabricated Man: The Ethics of Genetic Control, New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1970. Thomas, L., Notes of a biology watcher: On cloning a human being, N Engl J Med, 291:12961297, 1974. Turner, P.O., Loves labor lost: Legal and ethical implications in artificial human procreation, University of Detriot Journal of Urban Law, 58:459-487, 1981. Walters, W.A.W., Cloning, ectogenesis, and hybrids: Things to come?, In Test-Tube Babies, W.A.W. Walters, P. Singer (eds.), Melbourne: Oxford University Press, 1982. Watt, H., What moral status has a human clone?, Bulletin of Medical Ethics, 93:2, 1993. WHO (World Health Organization), WHO Director General Condemns Human Cloning, Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization Press Office, March 11, 1997. Wilmut, I., et al., Viable offspring derived from fetal and adult mammalian cells. Nature, 385:810813, 1997. Wilmut, I., et al., Sheep cloned by nuclear transfer from a cultured cell line. Nature, 380:64-66, 1996a. Wilmut, I., et al., Implications of cloning. Nature, 380:383, 1996b.