Human Cloning free essay sample

Biotechnology is a field of biology that involves the use of living things in engineering, technology, medicine and other useful applications. The concept of this field includes a range of procedures for modifying living organisms according to human purposes. One major subject in biotechnology is human cloning. This is the asexual creation of a genetically identical copy of a human, human cell or a human tissue. It is a controversial issue and there are many reasons for and against cloning human beings. Many scientists are saying that human cloning is a positive thing, such as Dr Ian Wilmut. He said [Human] cloning promises such great benefits that it would be immoral not to do it. Cloning a human would involve removing the nucleus from an unfertilised egg cell, transferring a nucleus from a mature (or somatic) cell into the egg cell, then stimulating the egg to divide and transplanting it into the surrogate mother to grow. We will write a custom essay sample on Human Cloning or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page There are many positive outcomes as a result of human cloning. A large problem in todays society is infertility. Many couples are unable to have children of their own due this problem of infertility. Cloning human beings is one solution for this natural problem. It is a medical breakthrough that could provide couples with children of their own. Although the couple could adopt, they might want a baby of their own. Human cloning allows an infertile couple to have children that are genetically theirs. Some mothers want to go through the pleasure of actually having a baby, which is why cloning would be a better idea for them, rather than adoption. Human cloning can also help in cases where a parent has an inheritable genetic defect or disease. It would provide a better chance of having a healthy child, with no inherited genetic diseases. Human cloning has also been seen as a solution to gay and lesbian couples wanting children. Cloning will allow gay and lesbian couples to produce a biologic offspring. Many people in our society are affected by genetic diseases. A genetic disease is an illness passed on, through genes, to generations of a family. Advances in human cloning will help people to replace defective genes with healthy ones. Cloning humans and cloning technologies can also help researchers in the field of genetics. They might be able to understand the composition of genes and genetic diseases in a better manner. The real benefit of cloning humans is that genes will be able to be altered, thus genetic diseases can be removed from the offspring. This will help and benefit the health of future generations. The most deadly disease that scientists might cure would be cancer. Cancer strikes 125,000 people each year, and approximately 2. 2 million cases have been documented. According to â€Å"Why Clone Human Embryos? † â€Å"Oncologists believe that embryonic study will advance understanding of the rapid cell growth of cancer. Altering genes in a cloned human can also allow scientists to reproduce a certain trait in humans. They would be able to produce people with certain qualities, traits and characteristics, making humans more evolved and able to adapt quicker to the changing environment. Although there are many advantages to human cloning, there are also some disadvantages. Cloning is not yet sufficient or correct. It is a major scientific challenge to create a perfect clone and there are still side effects and health problems relating to cloning animals, let alone human beings. The real question with cloning humans is If animals cannot be cloned to be perfect how can they create a perfectly functioning human clone? With animal cloning, there have been a variety of abnormalities, including kidney, liver, heart, blood vessel, skin, muscles and immune system problems. There are also problems with gigantism and many limb and facial abnormalities. The same problems would be expected when cloning humans. 95-99% of cloned embryos, including humans, die before birth. Advanced Cell Technology found that 25% of clones showed severe developmental problems soon after they were born. Statistics also show that there is more than a 50% chance of the cloned human being born with abnormalities. With these statistics, it is clearly shown that there is not a good possibility of the human embryo living passed birth. Due to the inefficiency of animal cloning and the lack of understanding, many scientists believe that it would be highly unethical to start cloning humans. Scientists also do not know how cloning humans could impact the mental development of a clone. The mental development of a human is crucial for the growth of healthy humans. Cloning humans, at this stage, would be ethically irresponsible. Cloning also has a major ethical side to it. Many people believe that it is wrong to play God and genetically alter humans qualities and traits through cloning. They also believe that cloning humans causes destruction to the embryo. The Roman Catholic Church, under Pope Benedict XVI, has condemned the practice and creation of human clones. The Dignitas Personae states that it represents â€Å"a grave offence to the dignity of that person as well as to the fundamental equality of a people. † Christians and Jews oppose human cloning and call it highly unethical and unnatural. Paul Billings, co-founder of GeneSage, stated â€Å"there is no right to have a genetically related child, cloning is not safe, cloning is not medically necessary, and cloning could not be delivered in an equitable manner. † Furthermore, The House of Representatives passed the Human Cloning Prohibition Act of 2001 to ban all cloning in Australia. This act was passed on and made official in December 2006, although therapeutic cloning is now legal in some parts of Australia. Many people still disagree about cloning humans, as scientists have not yet made a perfect clone. Molecular biologist Kathy Hudson said â€Å"But Im not sure it will ever be ethical to prove that it is safe because that would involve human beings in those experiments – and is that ethical? † Human cloning could be a medical breakthrough for the future, but currently it is unsafe and highly unethical to experiment on human embryos. The risks of abnormalities are too high to start cloning humans and the consequences of something not working in cloning are huge. With so many unknowns concerning cloning, the attempt to clone humans at the moment is considered dangerous and ethically irresponsible. Human Cloning free essay sample The idea of human cloning is truly bewildering. Combined with genetic engineering, it is the stuff of legendary science fiction. Imagine a human being created to be the epitome of perfection in all aspects; appearance, intellect, and health. It would be as though we were gifted with an evolutionary leap into our own futures long before it arrives on an intellectual level, and on a physiological level perhaps attaining a perfection of health and body that could have never existed. With great intellect comes great discovery, and humans are truly incapable of imagining with accuracy what the future holds, for example, there is no limit to the potential contributions that a clone manufactured to become the most intelligent human ever to exist could bring forward. When stated in this way, the idea of cloning humans sounds ultimately good. Surely such an individual would be treasured by our world, and valued for their accomplishments and benefits to humanity. We will write a custom essay sample on Human Cloning or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page The revelations that could be brought forward, the cures for disease, the greater understanding into what makes a human a human, the fundamental principles of the creation of life beyond what we currently are aware, these are all found in the study and experimentation of human cloning. But what would be the cost? Dr. Ian Wilmut, the man responsible for successfully cloning the sheep Dolly in 1996, claims that we should not clone humans for intelligence because genes are only part of what makes one a genius. Wouldn’t this proposal be precisely why we should or would want to clone a human? By knowing before their existence that this human clone would have the potential to advance science, technology, or culture, and then proceeding to make investment in their futures by providing optimum environmental factors such as training and opportunity they very well could surpass the original genetic source. Human cloning results in a child born into a forced existence, not simply allowed. Clones are not planned due to emotional bonds nor do they come about through random happenstance of the enjoyment of sexual procreation, therefore they would never truly be viewed as natural or belonging to the species, and could never be allowed that which every person birthed with intent is entitled: the state of being wanted and loved simply because they became. This argument of equal existence jeopardizes the potential for agape love, and many other positive emotions. The emotions felt toward the clone could not necessarily be negative and perhaps would be most beneficent, for many arguments such as the infertile couple or the couple wishing to clone their deceased child would certainly love the child as parents are apt to do, but on the clone’s behalf this love will be eventually recognized as directed toward them not because of their many traits and qualities as an individual, but because of what they are. They will only be loved for the idea of that which they represent – the impossible child or the replacement. Imagine you are the first cloned human. You are special. You are different. You are unlike any other living creature on the planet. You have no â€Å"true† mother and father; you are a collection of cells manipulated into stopping and starting in a Petri dish to eventually result in the form of a human being. There were potentially hundreds of other â€Å"babies† of you but the majority of them were mutated through mistakes, destroyed intentionally, or died before being birthed. Up to 30% of the others like you were born, but with disabling and debilitating conditions which most likely left no alternative other than euthanization. There may be more like you created, who would have the same genetic advantages and no apparent negative genetic mutations, but what if they thrived on a higher level or contributed more than you are capable? How does this make you feel? As if you weren’t living up to expectations? Kantian theory holds that a person is always to be treated as an ends and never only a means. When looked at through a physiological viewpoint the cloned person is not exactly like the clone. Nuclear transfer does not produce 100% genetic identity (Brock), nor does it account for nature versus nurture factors. There is no guarantee of the possibility to produce a clone with the same capabilities of potential of their predecessor. Little is known about whether it is at all possible, and without human cloning experiments we may never know. Any attempt to complete these experiments, since they would be performed using humans as a test subject, would absolutely quantify the clone as a means without ends in themselves. In order to establish what we would need to know to weigh the benefits against the consequences of human cloning, we would have to first deny the rights to autonomous life and happiness of the individual. Clones in all forms would, by most, be treated as representations of people, but not as equal peoples. Throughout history the human race has shown great difficulty in accepting many forms of alternative or non-traditional customs, values, and beliefs which do not coincide with the â€Å"norm†. Racism, Sexism, and Homophobia are all testament to humanity’s intolerance of perceived extreme differences. Wars are waged on a daily basis throughout the world due to the human incapability to settle matters civilly, mostly due to greed and corrupt power, and many of those wars result in the deaths of innocent people who have no part nor say in the issues at hand. Another argument that human clones would not be considered equal people addresses that they are a manufactured production and their creation is based primarily in economic utility. Before they are even born they are perpetual slaves to science and society (Myerowitz, 2004), potential profit to investors, and as being such are not privy to rights and issues of equality that would interfere with those aspects which were determined before their creation. Human cloning is the coercion of life for purpose, through and for profit. Whether human cloning is performed under the guise of emotional fulfillment to bereaved parents, or to that of scientific and psychological studies of genetic dominance, emergent traits, or differences in the effects of environmental standards makes no difference to the ends of the clone. Most certainly there are laws that prevent abuse and exploitation of children and others, and it is supposed that these laws and rules would be applied to clones as well, but there is a considerable difference between a naturally born human child and a genetically engineered human clone child. Which of these two children require an exorbitant investment of resources and wealth to produce? This circumstance ensures that the clone not only is assigned moral or ethical value, but a monetary value as well. I am unable to ration something as costly as the creation of potential as not being seen as an investment, or worse, a possession. In virtue ethics, the question of What sort of person should I be? (Rsrevision,) is posed by those looking to determine the good of their actions. When applied to the subject of human cloning the question is removed by the creators and is replaced with the question, ‘What sort of person should the clone be? ’ The scientist experimenting would be performing a practice. This would involve unique skills. If the reason for experimentation is for the good of society then it would be considered an internal good and acceptable. However if experiments are being carried out for the sake of wealth/fame/honor then these would be external goods and not as worthy. Predetermining a person’s life demonstrates extreme hubris on behalf of all involved in creation – even those who would do nothing other than allow it. Even if for the sake of a greater good, human cloning could not be seen under these circumstances as a virtuous procedure. With any possession without direct concept, design, and intent of creation by a lone individual there is an unclear issue of property ownership. Should you say that a human clone could not be considered property, examine that this parentless child is produced into a system of life with intent. A human clone would doubtfully be created just to see if it could be done, as the life of an individual, particularly the life of an infant to child, holds ethical value to all humanity and the cost of creation would be too high to be charitable without purpose. Most likely the motives behind human cloning would be for more direct purpose, such as coercing the existing genetic potential of an individual into something greater using variable environmental factors and encouraging more emergent traits that may not have become apparent in the natural human from which the clone was derived. Those individuals which are responsible for the upbringing of the human clones ultimately have direct motive to produce the desired outcome of the clone’s future. Now some would argue that this is the same view that most parents hold over their children (Woodhouse) – their child is their property and the parents plans are made to direct that child toward both the immediate actions and future actions of the parents choosing. Just as with the parental child, the cloned child would be treated as such, but the intention of the natural parent is most times to establish a point in time which the child would become an autonomous being and no longer dependent on the parent as they are then capable of making their own choices. With the cloned child there would be no such point of autonomy, as the experiment in itself is a controlled study, and that control is required to illicit the product or goal which was intended before the creation. Here, we could also entertain the potential for government intervention and interference. US federal government has already implemented that no federal funding may be used for the purpose of human embryonic research or cloning. The United State’s FDA and state governments already are regulating human cloning (Hamburg, 2009). Any procedure of genetic cloning without the direct permission of the FDA is a violation of federal law and anyone involved with such experiments would face legal prosecution which includes penalties of up to 10 years in prison and fines upwards of $1,000,000. 0. Without definite guidelines from the US federal government, many states have written their own legal policies and laws to establish what is and is not acceptable in the field of human cloning and genetic engineering (Denver office, 2008). The American Medical Association has also made public their stance on the topic of human cloning, claiming that too little at this point is known to establish re ason to go into human cloning, as well as potential issues with social reaction and legislation being vague (American Medical Association, 2008).

Review What is this Mother Fxxker with a Hat All About

Review What is this Mother Fxxker with a Hat All About Whenever someone sits down to watch a play that has such a controversial title, one does so expecting anything. The performances in â€Å"The Mother Fxxker with the Hat† live up to this expectation. The play is mostly a high-octane shouting match that has the actors’ foaming mouths showering the front row audience with spit.Advertising We will write a custom essay sample on Review: What is this â€Å"Mother Fxxker with a Hat† All About? specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More The shouting matches aside, the comedy rich play is still a beautiful ensemble of talent. The title of the play should not lead anyone into thinking that the performance in this play is reckless. â€Å"The Mother Fxxker with the Hat† was scripted by Stephen Adly Guirgis and it is now showing at the San Francisco Playhouse. The staging at Playhouse marks the West coast’s premiere of Guirgis’ play. The play premiered on Broadway i n 2011 featuring a star-studded cast. The production is done under the direction of Bill English. In the production’s program, the director notes that Guirgis’ characters are always meant to be on the path of discovering their spirituality. English makes references to actors in another of Guirgis’ production known as â€Å"Judas Iscariot†. In this latest production, the supposedly spiritual characters are struggling addicts who are embroiled in a fusion of jealousy, love, and addiction. The performances in this play are supposed to be comical all through save for some moments near the end of the play. The cast of this play is magnificent to say the least. The actors bring out Guirgis’ comedy with starling prowess. The main character is Jackie a former drug dealer who is being released from prison after a two-year sentence. Gabriel Marin presents a very likeable Jackie who is determined to finish his parole without incident. To accomplish this, Jack ie joins a twelve-step rehabilitation program. Gabriel Marin is able to shift his performance from the calm Jackie we first meet to the out of control Jackie who suspects his girlfriend of cheating. The shifts in his emotions are seamless and he is able to carry his audience through a journey of emotions, anger, and raw comedy. As the performer who has to interact with most of the other characters, the success of other performers depends a lot on his performance.Advertising Looking for essay on art and design? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More In this play, Marin the main performer is taking a comically charged and adventurous journey. He is on a quest to look for the â€Å"mother fxxker† left a hat at his girlfriend’s house after a probable illicit liaison. The lovable Marin’s first lively performance is witnessed when he goes to see his addiction sponsor about this matter. When he gets to Ralphâ €™s place, he discloses to him that Veronica has been having an affair behind his back. Even though Veronica is still the one doing drugs, her overall composure seems better than that of both Jackie and Ralph. Marin and Lumbly’s performances are top notch as far as their explosiveness is concerned. Jackie is going to seek his sponsor’s help because he suspects that a shock like this is enough to make him relapse. However, when Jackie gets to Ralph’s place, Lumbly delivers a very mixed performance. On one side, he presents the audience with a caring sponsor who has his life in order. On the other hand, he is still able to communicate his innermost struggles to the audience. When this play premiered, Ralph’s role was assigned to Chris Rock, a very seasoned actor. This initial casting might have been by chance or by design. However, it is clear that this role is very important to the play. Ralph is by all means the epicenter of all the themes in this pla y. For instance, through Lumbly’s Ralph the audience is able to grasp the two-sided nature of addiction. Ralph exemplifies those people that do not get into drugs because of their under achievement. His performance also shows that addiction is mostly as a result of inner struggles as opposed to outer struggles. Through this scene, it is also clear that although both Lumbly and Jackie are on the right path, their battle is far from over. Carl Lumbly’s Ralph is one of the people who interacts with Jackie the most. As Marin’s sponsor, Lumbly has to tune his performance with that of Marin. Ralph’s character is akin to the play’s success. When the play premiered, Chris Rock took up this role and it has remained popular since then. The expletive-filled conversations between Jackie and Ralph are supposed to be both emotional and comically vulgar. The actors portraying these emotions try their best to maintain this balance but eventually their performances end up being more vulgar than comical. The supporting cast in this play does a good job that warrants a nod of approval from the audience. In most productions, the performances of the supporting cast are easily overshadowed by those of the main players. â€Å"The Mother Fxxker with the Hat† features a supporting cast that bears striking resemblances with the main cast. Julio is the only supporting actor whose performance stands out.Advertising We will write a custom essay sample on Review: What is this â€Å"Mother Fxxker with a Hat† All About? specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More One of the supporting performers in this production is Isabella Ortega who assumes the role of Veronica, Jackie’s long time girlfriend. Veronica and Jackie have been on a journey of love since the eighth grade. When Jackie is arrested for selling drugs from their New York apartment, Veronica waits for him to serve his two-year sentence. Or tega’s performance is good enough to confuse even those who are keen among the audience. She is able to exemplify a loyal and faithful girlfriend until the hat incident. This is where she is able to deliver a confusing performance. Half of the audience believes her performance as a faithful girlfriend while the other half questions her faithfulness. Her foul-mouthing techniques are also hard to forget. The most notable performance by a supporting actor is by Ruddy Guerrero who plays Julio. He is able to deliver a macho performance and at the same time deliver the play’s funniest performance. The scene with Jackie and Ralph seeking his help when they are hiding a gun is exceptionally funny. His performance is basically the â€Å"other type of performance† in this play. Margo Hall who plays Victoria, Ralph’s wife was billed as one of the most seasoned actors in the play. However, her performance did not have a lasting impression on me. It is mostly lukewarm and a bit too procedural. The director of this play is blessed with a huge stage that can make any stage-designing dreams a reality. English does not let this advantage slip through his fingers. Instead, he makes use of the huge stage by putting together three different scenes. All three scenes are at different places. One is a bedroom, the other is a living room, and the third one is the scene of a balcony. The stage is designed to depict New York in the most realistic way possible. The exterior brick-wall design on either side of the stage makes it feel like a real city. The difference between Ralph’s middle class apartment and Veronica’s colorful low-income house is emphasized by the stage’s design. Although these two live in different worlds financially, they both have to deal with the demons of addiction. The placement of Julio’s apartment is meant to liken him to Jackie’s guardian angel. This is because Julio is always prepared to offer his help to Jackie. â€Å"The Mother Fxxker with a Hat† is a play that focuses on the addiction theme. Guirgis meant to portray addiction as the unifying factor in this play. Jackie paints the picture of a lovable under achiever while Ralph is a diligent man who has accomplished a lot. Both men are judged differently from the outside but they still have to fight similar battles.Advertising Looking for essay on art and design? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More The playwright does not wish to engage the audience in an emotional roller coaster. Instead, he knows that after all the laughter dies down, deep thoughts will inadvertently take over. This play is like one of those movies that have you laughing at one moment, and then have you depressed the next. This production is almost like a comedy marathon because its emotional bits are very few. During the entire show, the performers use gestures, loud voices, and physical expressions of emotions. The elegant nature of this stage makes this production seem elegant. The wideness of the stage and the height of the ceilings seem to be the only things protecting the audience from the type of language being exchanged at the stage. English’s superb directing is mixed with accurate portrayals of Veronica’s highs, Victoria’s repressed anger, Jackie’s controlling nature, Ralph’s slyness, and Julio’s good nature to make this play a success.

What kind of material success and political progress the first decade Essay

What kind of material success and political progress the first decade of the Twentieth century brought to Europeans - Essay Example The first decade of the twentieth century was a very tumultuous period in European history. Prior to the First World War, that was to take place shortly after this decade, European powers had succumbed to several disputes. First, there was the Franco-Prussia war of 1870 which led to the unification of the Germans in 1871. The war saw a shift of power in Europe with the Prussians basking in the success of their military endeavors. After the war, German sought to secure its place among Europe’s elite in terms of power and military strength. This shift in power unsettled Britain, which begun to seek alliances with other European countries.As Germany increased its naval power to rival that of Britain, Britain allied with France to balance power in Europe. Britain also allied itself with Japan as Germany opened diplomatic ties with Austria-Hungary and Italy. These alliances increased tensions in the Europe as the fight for military power ensued in the continent. Art in pre-world wa r Europe began evolving as it embraced modernism that was rife during this period. The tensions between European countries were mostly due to the introduction of modernism in Europe. Artists were challenging the traditional role and production of art that thrived prior to this period. Artists were adapting methods such as cubism and futurism to capture the rapidly evolving world during this era. Society in the decade prior to the First World War expected a war due to the diplomatic tensions between European countries during this era.