Cloning is a very controversial issue. According to national geographic there have been clones of cats, sheep, and wildcats. However, most of these animals don’t reach adulthood and suffer from diseases after they are cloned and some even suffer while they are being cloned. The first cloned cat by Genetic Savings and Clone is two years old and her name is CC. But she is not colored the same as her donor, they said because she is calico and calico cats will never look exactly like their donors. They however will never be the same cat as the donor because souls or personalities cannot be copied.
There are numerous ethical issues that accompany this controversial topic. The humane society believes that people clone their animals to deal with their grief of losing the animal, but they will just have to do it again when the cloned animal dies. Also, four million animals are killed each year because they are not adopted, so the humane society feels this is a good reason not to clone animals.
As I was reading, I thought about when we were discussing the personhood of animals. If we clone an animal does that copy version of the original animal have the same rights or personhood as the original? It is still an animal but it is a genetically composed and man-made creature.
Do you think a cloned animal deserves the same rights as a naturally born animal?
Sunday, December 12, 2010
In response to Bee: Pet Cloning
Would you ever try to get your pet cloned?
I would never ever get my pet cloned. I find the whole idea of cloning unnatural and disgusting. It is not our place to mess with nature in this way. Like Bee said, your pet does not come back as your pet because it isn’t your pet, your pet is dead. It is another animal that has the same genetic makeup as your old pet and that’s it. This new cloned pet does not poses the soul of your old pet and therefore it is not your old pet, souls will never be copied. I think cloning currently is and will confuse people’s minds. Our DNA does not make us who we are, our personalities, what we poses inside us that can’t be seen or touched is what make us who we are. And again as Bee said cloning animals may one day lead to the cloning of humans which would be disastrous and heartbreaking in my opinion.
Why do we feel the need to experiment with such things as cloning, is it our curiosity or our mere selfish desires to obtain something that drives this kind of tampering with nature?
I would never ever get my pet cloned. I find the whole idea of cloning unnatural and disgusting. It is not our place to mess with nature in this way. Like Bee said, your pet does not come back as your pet because it isn’t your pet, your pet is dead. It is another animal that has the same genetic makeup as your old pet and that’s it. This new cloned pet does not poses the soul of your old pet and therefore it is not your old pet, souls will never be copied. I think cloning currently is and will confuse people’s minds. Our DNA does not make us who we are, our personalities, what we poses inside us that can’t be seen or touched is what make us who we are. And again as Bee said cloning animals may one day lead to the cloning of humans which would be disastrous and heartbreaking in my opinion.
Why do we feel the need to experiment with such things as cloning, is it our curiosity or our mere selfish desires to obtain something that drives this kind of tampering with nature?
In Response to Bryan
Why is utilitarianism such a common view to have in today’s world?
I think utilitarianism is so common because it is in our human nature. We tend to think that if the outcome will make things better then what we do to get there, no matter how immoral, makes it ok. If we need to tell that lie to keep a friendship or kill a hundred rats to find a cure we do it because we desire the results that the action will produce. Most will do just about anything to get something they desperately want. We convince ourselves that our actions will be justified by the results we obtain. As we know, this is not always true. It takes a larger person, therefore maybe more morally stable, to tell the truth to your friend then to selfishly lie to them just to avoid the conflict. Just as killing a hundred living creatures might not always be the best option. We are utilitarian because of our selfish natures.
Is there any reason to believe that “the ends justify the means” is a good statement to use to justify using animals for experimentation to find a cure for a disease?
I think utilitarianism is so common because it is in our human nature. We tend to think that if the outcome will make things better then what we do to get there, no matter how immoral, makes it ok. If we need to tell that lie to keep a friendship or kill a hundred rats to find a cure we do it because we desire the results that the action will produce. Most will do just about anything to get something they desperately want. We convince ourselves that our actions will be justified by the results we obtain. As we know, this is not always true. It takes a larger person, therefore maybe more morally stable, to tell the truth to your friend then to selfishly lie to them just to avoid the conflict. Just as killing a hundred living creatures might not always be the best option. We are utilitarian because of our selfish natures.
Is there any reason to believe that “the ends justify the means” is a good statement to use to justify using animals for experimentation to find a cure for a disease?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)