Cloning is another hot topic in the news today. Click below to enter the tutorial on Cloning:http://learn.genetics.utah.edu/content/tech/cloning/
Spend some time completing the two interactive explorations: What Is Cloning? and Click and Clone.
You will also want to look through some of the shorter links on the right side of the tutorial: Why Clone?, Cloning Myths, and What Are The Risks Of Cloning?
Now that you have some background, please respond to the following questions:
1. You read about some of the main reasons for cloning--to study human diseases in animals, cloning stem cells for research, reviving endangered or extinct species, and cloning humans. In your opinion, is cloning ok? Are you ok with some types of cloning and not others? Explain.
2. One of the myths regarding cloning is that clones are carbon copies of the original (when in fact, there are environmental influences that would create major differences.) What is your opinion on the "Nature vs. Nurture" argument? How greatly are we influenced by our genes? By our environments?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
91 comments:
I personally think that cloning should be put to an end. Unless the government literally will kill the people doing it if they do it in such a way, that could cause war or weaponry. Cloning medication, fixing things, or any other good use, should be promoted. From a nature lovers standpoint,(mine), I would say that cloning shouldn't even be tried. Since the clone would only be a carbon copy of the original, and it could hurt nature, its not okay to keep going. Once everyone figures it out, it would be put to horrible use. Thats not even arguable, there are sick people among us, and we need to let nature be nature.
In my opinion i believe that cloning cant nor will it ever benefit humanity.The aspect of this goes against every law in the creation of human and animal life. life should begin through the process of reproduction, not through the hands of a scientist. the thought of cloning becoming normal in the future sickens me. life should only be created through reproduction of two living beings.
I don't believe in cloning. All it really is, is damaging. The animals end up having problems in the long-run that is if it even works. It causes them to have major defects, when it's not necessary to have an exact replica anyways. Then the same would happen to humans. It's something that shouldn't be allowed.
Yes, I think cloning is ok. I think that all types of cloning is ok. Science can have a huge leap forward if they start studying cloning much more.
I don't think that cloning is ok. The outcome may appear beneficial, but what it takes to get there doesn't seem to be right. With such a low success rate, I think the damage it causes to animals and everything else involved isn't worth it. Sometimes it is best to just let things be. Nature already has a way for reproducing that may not always be perfect, but it is better than lives depending on the works of a scientist.
This is again another touchy subject. I personally believe that cloning humans is not okay. When this happens this violates most every moral principle and belief that I and many others have. Cloning plays with nature. It damages the sacred joys and responsibilities that parents have. There is a very real political problem: what if you dictator has an army of personal clones so that when something goes wrong within him, he can get some new part and keep on chugging away, ruling with an iron fist? Cloning never benefits people in the long run.
While I agree that the cloning of humans goes against morality, there are benefits. for one, human cloning technology can be used to reverse the number one killer in the United States and in many other industrialized nations, heart disease. There are many other benefits to human cloning and I encourage those who are strongly against cloning to visit http://www.humancloning.org.
1. I do believe that cloning is immoral, but it does have some benefits. I believe that cloning can be beneficial if used in small scales and if it doesn't become out of hand. I think that any cloning that can benefit humanity or even mother nature is okay, but it cannot hurt anthing, nor become an "activity" that tons of scientists begin participating in. We should not become dependent on cloning for ANY reason.
2. I think that nature is a very important aspect in any human's life, it shapes life as we know it. It has done a fine job up until now. (Thus, we shouldn't begin to drastically mess with it.) However, nurture is very influencing too. Our genes make up who we are (how we cross our arms, can we roll our tongue, etc.). Our environments effect what we believe and who we are too. You grow up with your parents effecting your beliefs and and actions. All in all, both nature and nurture effect human beings.
Cloning can be okay in certain situations, but not all. Reproductive cloning and therapeutic cloning are so different that one cannot simply accept or reject cloning as one subject, when it should really be adressed as two separate issues. I’m okay with therapeutic cloning because it can save peoples lives who have no other choice left but to clone. Patients are dying everyday because they need organ transplants, and there aren’t enough transplants to support all of those in need. Reproductive cloning is okay in some aspects like trying to save endangered species, but the danger for reproductive cloning is too high. Not danger as in they clones won’t be born, but danger in their health as time progresses. The power to perfect genes and make a “superior” human being is too much power for scientists to have. Who knows, history might repeat itself with Adolf Hitler. I think it would be better to prevent it all together rather than take the risk. Regarding “Nature vs. Nurture”, I believe that people are only influenced by their genes as far as looks go. Environment truly shapes a human being, because of where someone is brought up, and the society that has influenced behavior and mannorisms. Someone definantly will not have the same personality of someone who was cloned, just the same genetic make up.
1.) Personally I do not believe that cloning is okay. It isn't a natural part of life and I think making a clone of something is kind of disgusting. especially a dead pet, that is very wrong to me.
2.)I think our personality is greatly defined by how we grow up and live our lives. Genetics dont determine how we are going to behave unless it is contributed to a personality disorder.
In my opinion, cloning is not okay, and should not be allowed to continue in society today. The process in which cloning goes through in my opinion is not very safe or beneficial. To clone as an experiment on living things is also not acceptable. When a living person/things life is on the line, they need to have more precautions while cloning. The reproduction cycle is natural while cloning is made from scientist who might make a mistake along the way, making the result, life threatening. In my opinion nature should be allowed to do its process of characteristics because parents do the job of growing and nurturing their child along the way. Parents and nature should shape a person and not a scientist. If a scientist were to be put in charge of the nurture, how would society be different from one another?
1. Cloning provides study for reviving extinct animals and treat diseases, but in some cases the procedure of cloning can be very controversial. Artificial Embryo Twins and Somatic Cell Nuclear Transfer allow reproduction without the need of mating, but that could result in over-population and possibly death-related risks. The way we collect the stem cell for this is another story, were in therapeutic cloning an organism hosting this cell is killed so the stem cell is received. Overall, cloning provides many benefits in the medical field, but the procedure comes at to great of a risk, which would become fatal to live human organisms.
2. Nature plays a very important role in human lives and shapes how we are able to survive, giving us certain characteristics, which could not be genetically replicated. This is more important, in my opinion, to how a "nurture" approach gives limited genetics to a certain environmental problems. Traits such as physical and behavioral do not gives as much benefit as an organism learning its surrounding, which cloning experiments cannot provide.
I do not think that cloning is okay. It is a power that can be very quickly able to be abused. Having the power to create a synthetic copy of someone is too strong for a person. Even though this has been tested very wrongly on animals i still believe that their is some defect.
I think cloning is meant for good intentions, however it's not very successful. I have mixed feelings about it. I believe that cloning any organism as a back up for therapy of the original is wrong. I don't see anything that bad about cloning twins at a fertility clinic-unless it's for picking and choosing of a gender or for perfect cells. The other issues with cloning is the clone itself, because it may not be as healthy and have less of a good life than the original. The other issue is the surrogate mother. There are women who are forced to bear cloned children, and animal surrogate mothers as well have no choice. So I'm mostly opposed to it, but not totally.
2. Perhaps at the base of things, our genes influence us, but the environments that we are raised in influence us more openly. For example, a dad and son may have the same body language, yet their opinions and interests in things differ by a long shot, because everything changes, generation after generation. You could say that generations in the past are more conservative than the generations today. Trends change. Therefore, the environment is the larger factor in one's influence.
I think that things happen for a reason and I think tampering with fait by cloning things in order to save life’s or increase population is wrong and immoral. I think that therapeutic cloning is a good idea but it’s a part of life that people get sick or injured and I think that by cloning body parts to try and save them would be messing with their fait and shouldn’t be done. I don’t think that humans should be cloned because it is going against moral standards and it would change the population and or a “normal” family. Also the danger involved with cloning and after cloning health issues are too high to risk trying to clone someone. I also don’t think that people should clone pets that have died because for one it won’t be the same animal with the same personality as before and also with all the strays animals we shouldn’t continue to bring ones that have died back. I think that people are only influenced by their genes as far as their looks and bodies. I think who you are is created by your environment and society. If you clone someone I don’t think that they will be the same person, just because they look the same how they act will depend on their environment and how they are raised.
1. In my opinion, I think that cloning is only ok to a certain extent. When it comes to saving an endangered species from going extinct, I think that it's a great idea to clone because I love animals. However, cloning humans is another story. Yes, I am an identical twin, but I think that twins are different. They are "cloned" naturally, but cloning a real person is weird because it's not natural and we as human being make the decision to clone ourselves. We need variety in the world. Not everyone can have a clone of themselves. Cloning is ok when done with an animal to help it's species survive, but other than that, seems really weird to be really getting into as a society.
2. I can completely agree with the fact that the environment and our genes can really play a role in the way we behave as humans. I have a twin, and even though we may look genetically alike, we are two very diverse people. She is messy. I am neat. She is a loud kind of funny. I am a quite kind of funny. We are really different from one another. With the whole "nature vs. nurture" thing, I agree because I know from experience. Anybody can see the difference between our personality because we are not the sam person, we just look like the same person.
I think cloning is okay to a degree, I think it is okay for scientific products but when it comes to eating cloned food or cloning humans I think that is not okay. To bring back an extinct species I can understand but I still don't view it as completely right, that species died about because they most likely couldn't adapt and if we brought it back how would it change? Cloning is a very controversial topic and I don't approve of it. I think that are genes makes up for a lot of who we are but I also think that the items and people in which we surround ourselves change who we are in addition. Take a kid from America and a kid that grew up in the middle east-they probably share similar genes but they make act different based on the different enviorment they are surrounded by.
I do not think that cloning is okay. I think that it is something that has the potential to throw off the balence of nature on our planet. I think that once people realize the potential of cloning they will want to take advantage of it to make hybrid humans and animals. Also the word clone decieves people to thinking that they will be exactly the same, and have the same personality.
With nature vs. Nurture, I think that no matter how persicely cloned an organism is, the way it is raised and cared for will truly determine how they turn out.
There are two types of cloning, one of which I think is all okay- therapeutic cloning. Therapeutic is cloning of maybe a certain organ to save some ones life who has no other option. From lab, 80,00 people wait to have organ transplants, and 16 people die a day from not being able to have a transplant soon enough. Cloning to replace a dysfunctional organ with an exact healthy copy is beyond a great idea for scientists. Yet when you get to reproductive cloning, the whole entire situation is extremely messed up. Unless you're saving species, which results in saving the others who we share the planet, then there's way too many risks and it goes against the way humans are made. if there should be cloning, let it be the natural way it was made- identical twins. In my opinion, people who clone because the want a "superior" being or organism is only thinking of themselves. The risks of failure and risks for that superior being later in life are not even worth it. In terms of the "Nature vs. Nurture" I completely agree. A clone will not develop the exact same or act the same because of different experiences as the original clone. Environments can really change a person.
I think that cloning a human is not okay at all. It goes against how humans are supposed to be made. I am okay about cloning to save rare animal species that is about to meet its extinction though.
In my opinion cloning is not okay. The world is doing just fine without all different types of cloning. People die everyday. That is the way it was intended to be. So Why should we mess with the cycle of mother nature? My opinion on the "Nature vs. Nurture" argument is this, Nature is out of our control. We can try to harness its power as much we want but it's like predicting the weather. Yes, it's possible but it doesn't always turn out one hundred percent right. Nature is still in control. Our genes, are just that genes, they determine our physical characteristics but everyone is their own person. The have their own personality, their own thoughts, their own actions. Our genes only influence use as much as nature allows. The same applies to our environment it only influences us as much as nature lets us.
I don't think cloning is ok except for like single cells... such as a cell of a disease so we can clone it to learn how to kill it, but cloning humans and animals is just wrong. There's not a reason to try and create a whole new life, it wouldn't be able to think for it's self... it would be a waste when there is other ways to research. Also if an animal goes extinct, it's for a reason and cloning it wouldn't do anything because the new species wouldn't be real, and it would just die again because obviously there was a reason the original went extinct whether it be because of the atmosphere or a food shortage or whatever it may be, it would just repeat it's self.
Cloning is acceptable if it is reproductive cloning in order to salvage an endangered species. I am strongly apposed to therapeutic cloning. Therapeutic cloning is cruel and unjust. If something is living it needs to remain that way. Execution for parts is an unspeakable crime. Nature is uncontrollable. We only should control what we are supposed to. Our genes help define who we are. We express our genes every day of our life. Genes are very important. Our environments impact us but do not define us. Our environment partly shapes who we are but genes are definite from birth.
I personally do not believe that cloning is okay. It is not natural and it destroys the concept of being parents. If we could all just clone whoever we wanted to, I believe that we would eventually end up like Nazi Germany where one kind of people is superior to another. Our world would be flipped upside down and everything that we have been working for for hundreds of years would go down the drain just because people are selfish and can't give somethings up. In my opinion, both kinds of cloning is bad. If a person is cloned just do they can get new organs, their clone would be treated as an "it" and would live a sad life.
1.I think cloning of animals is fine, but cloning a human is just too morally questionable. Cloning in human could mean gene manipulation to make bigger, stronger, faster, smarter, etc, people that in my opinion goes against the laws of nature. Is there any other creature on earth that makes genetic copies of itself? The answer is no because genetic diversity help a species survive epidemics.
2.Genes are what makes us us. They make up our physical aspects like how tall someone is, how fast, or how strong. Our environment determines how those genes are used, if you’re fast run track, if you’re tall play basketball, if you’re strong play football or lacrosse or hockey. Point is genes determine how you can do something, environment determines what you can do.
1 .I think that cloning should be looked into a little more so it can be proved safe before I can say that it is ok. I believe that there is a slight exception to cloning for health reasons and that therapeutic cloning is ok but I do not think that cloning humans and even animals is the right thing to do. It is important for scientists to figure these things out, but humans and animals should be made naturally and not through a cloning process.
2. On the nature vs. nurture argument I believe that both our environment and genetic inheritance contribute to our development. Our genes make us who we are and the environment allows us to use the traits we acquired from our parents. Although genes make us who we are, I would say environment puts a greater impact on a human, based on how they react with the changes around them and how they use their traits to help in the nature aspect.
1. Cloning is completely alright. Cloning could one day actually save our universe, as well as specific species which are in danger of becoming extinct. For cloning to take stem cells from embryo's, that is a parents attempt to save their child. They aren't killing anyone, but merely preventing their growth, while some consider it immoral, it isn't up to them to judge such actions.
2. Where we grow up and how we grow up does change how we are when we age. If a lamb was cloned in a normal environment then tossed into a hill environment they might grow up with stronger legs to get around. So, in short yes where you grow up changes everything.
I don’t believe that cloning is ok, I think that morally it is wrong and that with it having a low success rate, it is truly not worth it. I think that nurture and nature have equal effects in our lives, nature is what we are genetically so that determines physical characteristics, but nurture and our surroundings develop who we are as people and create our personalities.
1. I believe cloning depending on what type of cloning is bad or good. I believe that it is okay for studying human diseases in animals, reviving endangered or extinct species because the beings being affected and killed are not humans while for the other reasons for cloning like cloning humans and cloning stem cells are not acceptable. Only God creates life for if we create life we don't know what those beings will be. Cloning stem cells for research is also not acceptable because a stem cell is a life and creating more goes back to the previous sentence while experimenting on a human is murder for we are destroying its life. 2. I think that we are influenced in our genes to look like someone and talk like someone but it is our environment that shapes the way our brain develops because in the end are you the same as your Dad.
1. I do not think that cloning anything is okay. If humans go in and mess with nature, then there can only be bad outcomes. There is a reason that every person is different, and if humans try to blend the line between natural and manufactured, then the situation can get out of hand. If the power to create multiple animals of a superior race gets into the wrong hands, there would be a huge shift in the way life is conducted.
2. In the debate between nature vs. nurture, I am definitely on the nurture side. I believe that the environment and the experiences people live through affect them more than anything. Our genes give us the upper hand in many situations, for example, Michael Phelps has a 6’7” arm span, helping him dominate in swimming, which has nothing to do with his environment. On the nurture side, if Michael had been raised in an impoverished village in Africa, chances are unlikely that he would even discover his talent.
I believe cloning in okay in some aspects. Reproductive cloning and therapeutic cloning are very different. Reproductive to me is okay because it happens naturally, but therapeutic cloning really has no use to our lives. The only reason I think therapeutic cloning could be useful to us is endangered species. But even that reason does not seem good enough to have someone risk their lives or be put in danger. As far as it comes to the environment, I do believe it changes the way one acts or lives. Although it does not give us our traits, but it plays a big role in the way we adapt to life. We, who live in America act different in someways to those who grew up in Europe. The environment allows people to discover things about themselves that they probably had no idea about, like say, a sport, like skiing. That sport can give them balance and arm strength. But if you lives somewhere warm, where there was no skiing, you may have not gotten the arm strength. So in other words, yes the environment changes the way one lives or acts.
Cloning in some cases are ok other places it is not ok at all. If it’s to help the human race than they should absolutely do it. If is for something to do with the human race than they should not do it. What I mean by that is cloning a baby or yourself for reasons so that they look just like the mom or the dad. If we are cloning just so that there is no more diseases or us getting sick than that is something we should not touch at all unless it is pills that they are taking not cloning a baby so that baby is perfect. Nature is what crated the twins or cloning not science. Nurture is what we do to our babies so that they stay nice and healthy. We are influenced by our genes because we are all different and unique to one another and we always want to know what is different between each other.
I think some types of cloning should be stopped. I think that cloning stem cells to cure diseases is very important, however cloning of humans will cause a lot of issues. Our society is already highly obsessed with perfection and if the opportunity arises to make the perfect human, those people will take over and could end in genocides of those that aren’t “perfect” by societies standards. However, I think that cloning of endangered species could be very helpful. I don’t think we should bring back extinct creatures because society has adapted to the world without these creatures and if they are brought back we would have to change everything. Endangered species that are dying off would be good to clone so that we don’t lose species that we can never get back again. The only issue with this is that once people know that there is an ability to bring back endangered species, polluting that planet and hunting innocent animals would only increase because there isn’t an issue of the animals anymore. My opinion on nature vs nurture is that environment and nurturing the individual is what makes up who they are. If clones were to be made, although they are identical copies of the people, their attitude and personalities would be completely different. They would not act the same or do the same things. Everyone is different, not because of genes but simply because of the all the elements in their life and environment make them up. A huge example is twins, twins look identical and may have similar behaviors but are two different people with different likes, dislikes, motivations and goals.
1. In my opinion, cloning, even for preservation of a species, is not okay. The natural world has revolved around the rise and fall of many species over millions of years. Because of this, if we alter the flow of nature, it could have negative side affects. I think cloning in general shouldn't be permitted because it would disrupt the way species have existed for the millions of years that the Earth has been inhabited. As dark as it seems, if we keep preserving human life when it is "time" for them to go, it will lead to over population and create many more problems than we already have.
2. I think that nature (mostly) determines how someone turns out. For example, a child with an abusive parent won't turn out the same as the same child with a loving parent. Genes influence how we look and function but personality can be affected by the surroundings. Like i said, i think our environments have the biggest influence on how we live our lives.
I think that cloning is wrong in all forms. Even if you could bring back an extinct species, you shouldn't be allowed to. There is a reason that the species is extinct, and that is messing with the laws of nature. There should not be more than one copy of any person or animal, that just messes with the universe.
I think that we are influenced by our genes only in the way we look, and other physical features. In any other way, we are influenced by the environment. The people we hang out with, the area where we live, and our home environments all have a different effect on how we are as a person.
In my opinion I am okay with some types of cloning but not others. My opinion really changed after I learned more about the process and the effects. I am not okay with the types of cloning that alter children or pets to be what their parents want. I think that is what makes us all special and different, and designing a kid or pet just goes against the ways of life. The cloning I am okay with is for medical reasons and to save peoples’ life. At first I was not okay with any cloning because I thought it killed an embryo which would turn into a baby. After watching the video in lab, I realized that was not the case. The embryo could not turn into a baby because it is not a union of an egg and sperm. I think cloning for medical purposes is a great thing because it could allow people to live a normal life and save them from lots of pain. I don’t really think our genetics really shape our lives, but I do think the environment shapes our lives. When we are growing up are parent s will try and raise us the way they want us to act, but we not be exactly what they think because of the people we are around and the things we are exposed to in our environment.
The way I see it, cloning any type of organism is morally wrong in others. I personally believe that cloning children or pets to meet the specific wants for parents or owners is completely morally wrong. I also think that everything happens for a reason. Specifically, i believe that any species that have become extinct were meant to be, and should stay extinct. Complete cloning of any organism is wrong in my mind, because of the high failure rates and problems in later developement of those organisms. a Cloning in that way messes with nature, and I could see it getting way out of hand, and throwing off the balance of our planet.
One of the characteristics of life is the ability to adapt to an organism's environment. Human's and organism's genes greatly effect how they function, and their various abilities. How organisms are raised effects how they interact and react to their environment, and how they grow with their environment.
There are two different types of cloning and they should be in two different categories when saying it should be aloud and shouldn't be allowed. The two types are therapeutic and reproductive cloning. I think that therapeutic cloning is okay because it can save peoples lives or help then live a normal life. People are dying everyday because there are not enough donors but with cloning they don't have to worry about having a donor available. In the case of reproductive cloning i think it is good in some cases but not in all. I think it is a good idea to do it if you have to save a species but i don't think it is a good idea for human reproduction because the dangers of it are high, meaning the long term issues. The power of having a superior person could be bad for scientist to have the power of. Who knows, history could repeat itself with Adolf Hitler and having a superior race. Overall i think it would be a good idea to not have those complications and just eliminate it. Someone that is cloned will not have the same personality just the same genetic make up because i think the environment influences personality not the genetic make up.
In my opinion cloning is a great idea. We can study and learn a plethora of information that we can collect from clones. We can learn about disease and how to stop it, we can learn about Dinosaurs personally, with one standing in front of us. Also we can put an end to arguments that have been prevalent in the human race since spoken language. Religion and Faith. By this I mean we can learn about the human soul. If we clone a human being, we can learn what they are like; will they have the same personality as the original? If they do and have a soul we can use that information to discuss religion. If they do not have a soul and are not even human we can learn stuff about the human race scientist never even dreamed of.
1. Cloning is completely morally wrong and could potentially alter life completely. In the past, nature has proved to be perfectly in sync with life and there is a sort of balance that should not be tampered with. The Earth's diversity has prevented mass disease and is the caused for countless benefits to every living organism. If this is even slightly changed, I believe that there will be unimaginable, negative changes in the future.
2. Our genetic makeup contributes many of our traits and compose our basic forms. However environmental interactions can easily change who we are and how our body functions. I believe that genes contribute most to our phyisical traits but not to personality.
In my opinion, I think that some of the reasons for cloning are acceptable. For example study human disease, cloning stem cells for research, reviving endangered species. I believe these because all of those will end up helping the human rece enourmously. But as far as cloning humans go, we do not need to do this by any means.
I believe that nurturing a child can at first start them like the other but as they go on in life they will run into different enviornmental interactions. These will end up changing the clone into a completely different person
I believe that some cloning is ok and other cloning is bad. For example, I think that therapeutic cloning is ok because its just cloning a organ that somebody needs. Many people are dying because they are not able to get a transplant. But if we make a clone of whatever that person needs then the rate of people dying would be lower. I think that reproductive cloning is wrong because it is against nature. For example if a animal is about to be extinct its because it could not adapt to the change in its environment. If we clone the animal What makes you think its population will all of a sudden come back to its normal numbers. And maybe if we bring back one population than another population will come into extinction.
1) I really don't have that big of problem cloning if it helps mankind. an example of this would be finding cure to diseases such as arthritis, diabetes and other serious illness. another reason when I believe it is ok is to make new organs in order to kill people alive. there is a very high demand for organs such as livers, lungs, and hearts along with others. and there are only so many people that die each year that are able to donate. Thousands of people die waiting for a transplant. and if they are lucky enough to get the organ you never if your body is going to except it.
2) I don think that genes effect our personality as much as the environment . I say this because there is a big difference between me and my brother. My brother is very hard-nosed and loves being at home. Unlike myself where I am very forgiving and I don't like being at home I would much rather be out doing something other than staying home and watching t.v.
In my opinion cloning is fine but to a point. We should no be cloning people just because we can. There should be a reason for us to clone people like if we clone people to use there organs then that might be fine.
I think nature versus nurture is interesting because if we do clone someone who is amazing at music doesn’t mean the clone will be amazing at music to. The clone didn’t go through the same events as the original person and he didn’t grow up in the same environment.
I think that cloning is ok when it comes to medical purposes. There are many people out there who are suffering from these harsh dieases that have no hope of survial unless they use cloning to create what's needed. If the clonig is used to create copies for "perfect" child then that is wrong because then we lose our diversity in our human race.
I think cloning is wrong in all ways. It’s not our place to be making organisms unnaturally. If its to save someones life I believe its still not right. Everyone dies one way or another. Especially cloning people and pets to a person needs is wrong. If a pet has died it is gone and it would be wrong and weird to bring an exact physical replica of it back. My thoughts on the Nature v. Nature argument is that nature was here before us as we should follow the laws of nature and stop trying to control it.
Personally I think that cloning in most cases is not a good idea. For the idea that the failure rate is really high and success lot really low. When knowing that this is correct I wonder if it will actually be a good idea to clone. Cloning is making another individual have the exact same DNA as a different individual. When using this in cloning an animal, the animal would have the same DNA but won’t act the same. A lot of cloners will want to clone so they have an exact replication. Our genes don’t determine the way something acts. This is why the animal will no me the exact same except the same DNA. Though, we are impacted in our genes by the way that our body works physically and mentally. If you think about it, we depend on the way we personally by the environment. If the environment was different, not so cold, then I would react in my actions and thought about the environment. With the thought of telling a child that they weren’t made by nature and instead by nurture would be difficult. I think that that is just an overall not good thought.
In my opinion, in some cases cloning can be reasonable such as cloning to produce transplant organs for a person in need of survival and cloning animals to produce more food and resources. Other cloning such as cloning pets for non-importance is unreasonable and unethical.
I feel that in today's society, genes are everything, at least physical appearances are. But in comparison, I feel our environment has so much more influence because if one small change occurs, it effects everything else.
I personally believe that cloning is not okay in almost all circumstances. To clone your dog is a lost cause. Even though it is a carbon copy of itself, it will be a 100% different animal because of environmental differences each could have experienced. However, I do think it is right to clone an endangered animal like a polar bear to help revive it's species , but trying to clone an extinct animal like a dinosaur could be very dangerous.
Cloning has tons of great purposes in life. But just like many things it can only go so far before it is out of control. There are some types of cloning that I do not think is okay. For example, bring a pet back to life. Like they said in the video, that the pet’s temper could be altered and not be the same as the person had hoped. It makes no sense to bring a pet back. A better alternative, in my opinion, would to adopt another pet to save him/hers life. Cloning would be great if it was used for science. Also, liked they talked about in the video (in lab) how the women needed a new kidney. This can save lives and put an end to waiting list for organs. That would save about sixteen lives everyday. That is huge all because we can clone things. Another thing that would be reasonable for cloning would be keeping endangered animals alive. We could save entire species from going extinct. I disagree to bring dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures back to life. Scientist have hypothesis to how they behaved and live, all sorts of things, but do we really want to find out? Some things are better to imagine.
I have always believed that you can have the same DNA and different a personality. It reminds me of the whole evil twin idea. My dog is a quite, sweet, well mannered dog who loves to hunt things in our backyard. The other dogs in her litter are crazy, wild dogs that live outside. They all have the same mother and father, but very different personalities. My family wanted an indoor family dog. So we shaped her path. The other owners wanted hunting dogs. They paved a path for their dogs. I’m not saying that what they did is wrong; it’s great that dogs are that smart and well trained, we just have different purposes for our dogs. All of the dogs have the same genes but very different personalities. This is going back to what I said before. That people shouldn’t clone their pets, in fear that they will change, and not be the dog it was before. Humans could act the same way. Twins I know look very alike. They act totally opposite of one another. This could be very wrong and not be the same.
-Jennifer Swomley 4th hour
Personally I think that reproductive cloning is wrong, but therapeutic cloning is, by all means, okay. When used for medical purposes cloning can create miracles. Therapeutic cloning can and does save peoples lives. Reproductive cloning, like to make a "perfect" pet or child is just wrong, and we can do without. Our genes make up who we are. We are unique, and god made us that way. To clone someone or something would take away their special qualities and differences and they would't even be naturally special. Our environment can and does influence everything. Our genes may make people look or appear the same but different environments will cause people to change on the inside. Just cause you look the same doesn't mean your are anything alike on the inside.
To me cloning for certain reasons such as study for human diseases in animals,cloning stem cells and cloning extinct animals is ok. But when it comes to cloning humans i am not ok with that. I am not ok with this because I feel like if you are a clone your not really alive in a sort. I mean they are alive but not in the same way because they are just copies of someone who is a already existing human and i don't think the same human can exist twice. I think people are immensely influenced by our genes because it is what makes you you. But more importantly, depending on how and where you grow up influences how you act and what you will turn out to be.
I am ok with some types of cloning, but not with others. I believe therapeuticc cloning is ok, along with cloning stem cells, and for studying human diseases. However cloning animals and humans almost seems like "playing God." I would say i agree with the cloning myth regarding clones as carbon copies. Clones are really just an exact hard copy. Their phenotypes, genotypes, DNA, everything is the same, but does that really mean they are the same person? The makeup of a person is much more than just their genes, its their character, personality and many other traits. For instance cloning Michael Jordan would result in someone looking exactly like him, but there is no garauntee they would even like sports, much less basketball. There is no gene in Michael Jordan's body that made him a good basketball player, it was all his environment. I think people are influenced by nature and their environment much more than we think.
Personally I think cloning is wrong. I think the only time it is okay is when it is used for medical purposes like cures for diseases. On the other hand I think cloning animals for experiments is wrong. Since cloning is new and we don't really know all the side affects I think we should only use it for serious issues. For nature vs. nature I think that we should follow the laws of nature and stop trying to copy it. Everything is different after all and that's what makes things unique instead of having copies of everything.
Overall, I think people should just let nature take its course and let everything grow or reproduce naturally but since people want to do otherwise, I think cloning is most acceptable if parents can't have children through natural reproduction but they would like a child that is genetically related to them or if someone had an organ failure and they need to make a clone in order to get a functioning one. Those ones provide a somewhat normal life for people but other types of cloning for personal reasons is a waste of money and resources. I'm not saying it should be completely banned, people should have the option to do whatever they want but I just think the random personal kind is stupid. If an animal is extinct don't try and bring it back, it's gone.
I think we are influenced by our genes and environments equally half and half. Yes our genetic makeup will always be the same (for the most part) but we are very adaptable beings. In the case of identical twins: two people's genes can be the same but the way they adapt to their environment can be and usually is very different (personality, likes, dislikes).
To me, cloning is hard to justify. I just don't find cloning humans natural, because its not! However if you are cloning a species of animal to save the specie, that is completely different because you are doing it for a much greater cause than scientific research.
The thought of clones being "carbon copies" I do not find true. For example twins separated at birth and into different families have ended up completely different, even though their genes are exactly the same. So I think the environment as a lot to do with a person and the way they are.
In my opinion i think that cloning can be a good human resource to use such as when someone is in a life or death situation, but i dont think it should be used on a regular basis for "fun". It is good that we have that technology and we can use that to research. If there was a person or a living organism that was cloned, they wouldnt act the same as the original one was like and it is not genetically related. so i have 2 view points on this.
After viewing the video in this week's lab, my point of view regarding cloning changed. In my opinion, cloning is okay, but to a certain extent. I find cloning humans unethical. Although it opens the door to those unable to naturally form a baby, it crosses the line of human dignity. However, cloning can be beneficial regarding extinct or endangered animals. I could see why cloning endangered animals could be beneficial. As humans, we have continued to destroy habitats of species across the globe. It is our job to restore and maintain these animals in order to provide for a healthier future.
I agree with the nature vs. nurture debate. The personality or "soul" if you will is impacted by how the organism is brought up or raised. If humans cloned then genetics do not prove that the personality of the clone would not be identical to the original copy. I think this would have a negative impact on human dignity.
I don't think that cloning is ok because nature didn't intend for people to make duplicates of everything. And testing a bunch of wild theories on animals just to test for human diseases isn't fair to the animals. If everybody can create body parts that they need, then nobody would die and then the population would be even larger than it already is! It just seems wrong to go against nature.
Our genes do not influence us as much as our environments. How the world is around us shapes us more as a person than our genes. I believe that the way we are brought up is way more influential than the way we look.
1. It's kind of a hard topic to support or be totally against. I think its inhumane to way of life because life should be natural but some ways of cloning is beneficial to save people with diseases and such.
2. I think environment has a lot to do with who a person is. like twins for example that may not live with each other. They have the same genes but different people.
1. I think it is okay to clone sometimes, but only for medical research. I don't agree with the copying of extinct animals, because there is a reason why they're extinct. Like the video said, we have destroyed their habitat and if they were brought back they would have no where to live and wouldn't be able to survive. Even though I'm not okay with the fact that they would clone dead animals, I think that it is okay to clone animals for medical research and obtain organs and things for human survival. They are very two different concepts.
2. I think if someone is an exact genetic copy of someone else it doesn't mean that they will act exactly like that one person. The person is still a person and will have different interests depending on how they brought up. So by that statement I think that nurture over powers nature, but only in some cases. Someone still could have the same habits as the other person just like identical twins. For example one person can have a different taste in clothes, but they both like strawberries. Overall, I think that nurture has a bigger influence, but the genetic makeup of two people does effect the little things.
1. Yes, I think cloning is ok. We are advancing in science very rapidly, is cloning is a prime example of what science is creating. With this research, we are able to clone organs to help transplants and help people live. We can study diseases in humans and even animals, and also help the risk of endangered species. However, I believe that we should not be cloning humans. Cloning should be an option to help people already living, not to create a whole new human. Medical research is, in my opinion, there to help those who need help with a disease, transplant, etc. I don’t think we should be creating new life and be interfering with the natural cycles of nature.
2. For example, if a person was to clone their deceased dog, they may look like the original dog but they would need to be trained and introduced to the family all over again. Like the video in lab stated, the dog would not know the family; it’s not bring an organism back from the dead. It’s merely creating a replica of the organism, but it is being raised in a new environment again. We are greatly influenced by our genes, and especially by our environment. All of us grow up in different households, which makes us unique in our behavior. It all depends on how we are brought up.
Cloning can be a great way to learn about “human diseases in animals, cloning stem cells for research, reviving endangered or extinct species, and cloning humans.” The problem begins when scientist only want to clone animals to bring them back at a later date than humans will not learn the importance of preserving what we have now and our future will be full of clones rather than genuine life forms produced in a traditional way.
Twins are said to be natural forms of clones and since some of them are exact opposites I think that is a great example of just how much the environment has an affect on the growing of human beings
I believe that some forms of cloning are okay while others are not. I believe that it is okay when it is used to study diseases, stem cells, and reviving endangered species. However, for endangered species, I believe that first we should try conservation before we jump to cloning. But I also believe that cloning is a dangerous path that can get very out of hand. I also believe that while who we are is influenced by our genes, especially our physical appearance, that we are mostly influence by "Nurture" rather than "Nature". We are influenced by those around us, we learn how to talk, how to dress how to act, all of these things aren't in our genes.
1. I think cloning is okay to a certain extent. Cloning humans and animals just for the sake of cloning is not okay with me. This type of cloning could result i major problems, such as cloning people without their knowledge. The cloning of stem cells for research is alright with me, and so is the cloning of cells to repair injuries or diseases. The only problem with allowing some cloning is how to draw the line. Once people have succeeded with cloning little things, they will want to go bigger.
2. Clones are not always exact copies of each other. Some depends on the environment that the clone is raised in. Twins that are identical sometimes have small differences. In the video that we watched in class, some of the clones had major differences in appearance.
1. I do believe cloning can become immoral and can cause ethical problems in the future. I think that cloning can remain moral as long as it is used on a smaller scale such as replicating other cells to help people with life threatening illnesses. When it comes to attempting to save endangered species and making designer babies, that is when it becomes out of hand and I believe immoral. So in conclusion cloning should remain on smaller scale.
2. If clones were to become apart of our daily life then the fact that they would look exactly like the person they were originally copied from won’t mean they will have the same characteristics or manners. The environment the clones will be raised in will play a huge role in behavior just like normal human babies today. And if a parent is raising a clone of himself or herself, than that child will most likely have the same personality characteristics of their parents, just like normal humans today. But say in the future people are able to sell clones of themselves to families wanting a child for money, (it’s a possibility) than that child have very little personality traits like that of their original copy. So in conclusion humans are greatly influenced by their environment.
I believe that cloning is okay if there are proper permissions granted to the person doing the cloning and the person is certified and educated in that field.i am okay with all types of cloning because we will never know what happens if we dont try it. that is how many scientific breakthroughs have happened. I also think that it is not an exact copy of the original. the clone has a brain and mind of its own. and it would have different features. We are greatly influenced by our genes and they effect a lot of how we act and live. We have to adapt to our environments and that is done by our bodies over time.
I am not okay with cloning. It goes against the whole way that life has been formed since the beginning of the earth. Natural reproduction is how that is suppose to happen. I don't believe in cloning for animals either because if they went extinct that means that their species could not longer be supported on earth so bringing them back is only going to be a temporary fix. Cloning is making an exact copy o genes even if it can be influenced by the environment. I believe we are heavily influenced by our genes it gives us our own identity, something to build our lives on.
I think that cloning seems like a good idea to people, especially ones who have lost a loved one, but the affects of opening this door would do more bad then good. There will always be people that seek to abuse and corrupt any kind of power, in this case its the ability to create an army of perfect soldiers, or a massive work force. We have already done allot of damage to our planet, if we add a few million clones then the amount of resources we will consume will inevitably destroy us.
I dont agree with cloniong as a whole but I think it could be a great thing in the fields of medicine and science but it could easilly be used for evil and warfare aswell. I think regulations should be set on it because if we used it for cloning organs and other things some people lack that are key to survival then it is the moral thing to do. I think messing with nature is wrong but I know if I was in need of an organ transplant and cloning was the only way I would want the cloned organ.
In my opinion cloning is perfectly ok. It causes no harm to the original copy or the surrogate parent, and therefore is purely beneficial to science. Cloning animals is ok because animals can’t reason and wouldn’t notice things like a whole room filled with nothing but their clones, but cloning in humans would produce social problems. For example, if a human with a strong body, good mind and good physical characteristics was cloned, it may eventually for a superior race similar to the Nazis and attempt to eliminate all other people. Cloning may produce an exact copy at birth, however the alternative natural conditions the clone is raised in would change it drastically from the original. I think our genes do affect us, however our environments affect us a lot more. For example, say a clone of Michael Phelps is made, however this clone is raised in the desert, where there is no water, no pools and nowhere to practice swimming. This new Michael Phelps obviously won’t be an Olympic swimmer or anything close to that.
1. In my opinion cloning is some ways is ok and in other isn’t. it is ok when cloning and endangered species because that is a physical being that is about to be extinct from the earth and if capable to bring an extinct animal back I feel It is ok, but that needs to be done with percussions because a certain animal brought back could entirely through of the ecosystem. But when it comes to humans I feel that the only way they should be produced is between two humans, because that is the human race it is not something to be tweaked with or experimented with. The only thing involving humans that is ok is the cloning of organs.
2. I feel we are greatly influenced by our genes is entirely determines who we are genetically. If two parents were to clone a child it would have no relation to the parent that was not cloned. We are very greatly influenced by our environments, our environments and the way were raised develops us a people and who we are emotionally and the way we act. And cloning someone does not mean they would act the exact
There are some parts I agree with cloning, and some parts I don't. To advance in cures of diseases and other injuries, i think cloning is a good idea when producing stem cells. But to go along with the ideals of Hitler, cloning could also be used for evil like creating a "perfect race" or something along the lines of that. As far as the Nature vs. Nurture debate goes, i think that messing with nature isn't right.
1. I believe that cloning is absolutley fine. I think that it is a good thing that can really help people (therapeutic cloning) and it can also help people get the same genes in a *similar* animal or pet (not the exact same animal or pet). I am ok with all types of cloning, whether it is reproductive cloning or therapeutic cloning.
2. I think that in the "Nature vs. Nuture" argument, that your genes do effect you a lot, and give you a baseline for things like your behavior, intelligence, and physical features. However, I strongly feel that how you are nutured greatly effects you, your behaviors, and mental and physical features and abilities. For example, if you have an original person, and then a clone, if the original person was abused or had a horrible childhood, they would be vastly different than a clone that grew up in a great environment. The original person may be mentally scarred and act oddly or in a different way because of it, while the clone, with the same DNA, may be perfectly normal and fine. I believe that your environment strongly influences you just as much as your genes do in the "Nature vs. Nurture" argument.
1. I believe cloning is an extraordinary solution to a terrible cause. Cloning can save many people's lives, along with animals, and the only thing that can really be lost is the failure of the clone to succeed. Cloning is really a matter of choice by the person receiving the treatment; many people think cloning is "playing God" or immoral but some do not so I believe it really is up to the person being affected by the process.
2. Mainly only physical appearance is copied when a clone is created. Their personality and characteristics are completed determined by their natural surroundings not who they were originally cloned from.
There are certain things I agree with as far as cloning goes. There are also things I most certainly disagree with. I do believe that cloning done to animals for the benefit of humans is fine. I believe this because from a religious standpoint, animals do not have souls. But cloning another human just to kill it for it's parts is completely immoral from my perspective. I believe life is a special gift from God and I believe using humans in this way in it's own sense is trying to play the role of God. I am also for cloning animals in order to fill the gap of a lost animal. The bonds that humans make with ANIMALS are ok. In my opinion this is a moral action because you are raising something you love to spend more time with it. I do think though that whoever wants to clone their pet must know that there is a strong likley hood of it not being at all like the original animal. On the contrary, I believe this is wrong for humans. I feel that this is REALLY trying to play God. Its almost like trying to resurrect like Christ did. I believe that this is raising false hope and that when someone dies they have died for a reason and that it is much better to accept it rather than to try re-awakening them. I also believe that because of his mercy, God would give the clone a new soul. So although it may look like the deceased, they are really nothing like the original.
As far as the whole Nature vs. Nurture thing goes, I believe that the person by nature would look the same, but depending on how they were nurtured would change the person's/clones personality, skills, mental diversity, etc. I think that one's environment has the potential to change them in a vast plethra of ways.
1.) I think the idea of cloning a human seems crazy. It is very unnatural and probably dangerous. However, I think it could have medical benefits and in some ways could be a good thing. Until scientist can prove it is not dangerous, I don’t think we should try to clone a human.
2.) I believe the environment in which you are born/ raised into has a lot to do with how we live. A cloned human would defiantly not have the normal emotions, mannerisms ect as a natural human.
1. The thought of cloning seems almost sci-fi but is a reality. In my opinion I do not think we should clone animals nor humans. But the medical advantages would be that you can replace faulty organs to save lives.
2.I do not believe that the clone would be anything like the actual person because the clone never experienced what the person has done. The environment we grow up in greatly impacts how we act.
As said many times over, cloning is an extremely controversial subject however cannot be ignored. Humans want to find the easiest and least stressful way to potentially save lives and cure diseases and cloning has been on the top of the list for quite some time. Over all, cloning is wrong and goes against the laws of nature but since it has already been done, there are benefits to look forward to. Artificial Embryo Twinning is the closest version of cloning there is to natural reproduction. If this cloning helps save peoples’ lives and maybe lead to a scientific breakthrough then it is acceptable.
As far as “Nature vs. Nurture”, Genes affect humans tremendously because genes are what humans are made of. But at the same time we all don’t live in a box. All humans are affected somehow by their environment and surroundings. Things such as sun exposure (ex: sunburn), outdoor and indoor activities (ex: sports), sicknesses (ex: flu) and a big one is smoking, affect them.
Cloning is pretty insane. Cloning should not be done because you're recreating a person but, honestly, that person will not act like the original person because they have a different soul and are influence under a different environment. I could handel cloning organs because that can save lives without creating a Frankenstein monster. People who want to have their own child but can't should suck it up because there are plenty of kids like me who would have to go to foster care if it weren't for people who adopt. Adopting is good. Cloning, however, is not. It makes experiments out of children and could lead to the "better race" deal.
-Charlie Payne
Cloning is when you take human cells and completely duplicate them to create a new organ or a new life form. I am 100% on board with cloning because I need a new organ and I feel that this would be the best way for me to get it and not have my body reject it. I am ok with all types of cloning. I feel that if I was cloned that the clone would be an exact genetic replica but would dress differently get different friends and have a different look on life because they are we're not raised exactly the same and could not be raised exactly the same.
I think that cloning is ok. If it helps people with their diseases then I am all for it. I think that all types of cloning are ok. They help people survive.
I think that the nature vs. nurture argument is not valid. There really shouldn't be an argument in the first place. The people that say that the clones are carbon copies of their original, do not know all the facts. They think that the whole clone is just like the original, and that you are killing them when you take the chromosomal DNA out. Our genes greatly influence us, but when you take the clone, you aren't exactly taking the genes of two parents.If anything, our environment affects us more than we think.
Cloning can be okay in some cases but in other places it is not ok at all. If it’s to help the human race than they should absolutely do it. If is for something to do with the human race than they should not do it. What I mean by that is cloning a baby or yourself for reasons so that they look just like the mom or the dad. If we are cloning just so that there is no more diseases or us getting sick than that is something we should not touch at all unless it is pills that they are taking not cloning a baby so that baby is perfect. Nature is what crated the twins or cloning not science.
In answer to number one, I am against cloning in all but one category. Cloning animals for special pets will only add to the already high number of pets out there without a home and someone to care for them. People should not be that picky. Uniqueness makes everything more fun and special. Also cloning animals for tests is a bad thing. Just because we cloned them does not mean the clone is not living. We can’t just keep running tests and doing bad things to animals. I think it would be amazing to revive endangered or extinct species, but what is the point if they don’t even have a habitat to live in? The reason they are gone or soon going to be gone is because we destroyed their environment. It’s sad, but that is the way things are. Cloning humans will also have negative effects. We have no idea what major defects or side effects there can be from cloning, if we start creating a “superior race” that will only lead to conflict, and much of the world is already over populated as is. The only thing I would be okay with is cloning a certain part of someone, maybe an organ, if their original organ has stopped working or has a problem. For the second part, I definitely go with nurture. We all are the way we are because of the way we grew up and the experiences we have. Our looks are a very small part of who we are. Everything else comes from experiences and our own unique reaction to things.
I believe that Cloning itself is not okay in the world today and here is why. Cloning is not okay because it damages the moral believe that I and others in the world around us have. Cloning has been a real problem in the United States' politics today. Say if a dictator had an army of clones, what would go wrong when he used the clones against others? Would he die?
Cloning in the world today will never have people successful in the next 20-50 years or more because we would like to be just the way we are.
No I think that cloning is a unnatural thing that is a thing that I think is definitally terrible and I dont think we should take advantage of science like this, it is not human and just crazy.
I do not think that the Nature v. Nature is a valid argument I still dont think making a carbon copy is good, I just hate the idea of cloning.
Post a Comment