|
|
|
LAWS OF SCIENCE
Should Congress ban cloning through legislation? February 24, 1998 |
|---|
NewsHour Backgrounders
January 8, 1998
Dr. Richard Seed announced he will go ahead with human cloning experiments.
December 29, 1997
A year-end report on remarkable changes in reproductive technology.
March 5, 1997
First a sheep was cloned, then a monkey, but if President Clinton has his way a human isn't next.
February 24, 1997:
Elizabeth Farnsworth leads a discussion of the science that lead to Dolly, the Scottish sheep cloned from another.
February 24, 1997:
Jim Lehrer discusses the ethics of cloning with a panel of bioethicists.
February 24, 1997:
A NewsHour background report on Dolly and cloning.
Browse the NewsHour's coverage of science
OUTSIDE LINKS:
Roslin Institute, Edinburgh, Scotland report on cloning sheep.
The Genetics and Public Issues Program at The National Center for Genome Resources (NCGR) discusses cloning.
Discussion of Ethics and Social Issues in Gene Research at the Human Genome Project.
University of Pennsylvania Center for Bioethics
VIEWER COMMENTS
David M. Brown of Seattle, WA, comments:
Why is it that Republican officials (who want so badly to reduce big government), try so hard to make government a bigger part of our lives? Who is going to pay to legislate morality-the Republican National Committee?
Kent Johnson of Walworth, WI, comments:
Human cloning should not be discouraged, it should be encouraged. Certainly we could use more people who are born gifted, such as musical and artistic prodigies and scientifically gifted people. Clone such people and who knows what additional gifts they might bring to mankind! How about cloning races which are nearing extinction? Scientific experimentation and research should be encouraged by the government, not condemned. The morality involved with human cloning will be worked out after science achieves it. The biggest objection to cloning is coming from people who believe in God; who say that man should not be doing God's work. Cloning is just one more bit of evidence that God is irrelevant (and always has been).
Zachary Ross of San Francisco, CA, comments:
New technological developments give rise to controversy. People feel the need to plan for the future; therefore they support new legislation in an attempt to direct the future in an orderly way. But what people fail to realize is that, regardless of any legislation passed, technology will continue to grow and develop. There is no possible way to stop the development of technology in its tracks. For good and bad, we are forever going to be presented with new developments that we cannot fully understand or appreciate.
An overall ban on human cloning will not prevent the knowledge of how to clone humans from developing. Scientists will be able to get at the crux of the problem via experiments on animals. Such a ban would only limit our ability to address life-threatening genetic diseases. Therefore, a total ban on human cloning will only hurt us in the long run.
Moral issues should not be considered. Congress should not be in the business of legislating morality: issues such as abortion, flag burning, and cloning must all be treated equally.
Marvin George of Sierra Vista, AZ, comments:
I believe their should be halt to human cloning experiments that is threating right now. I hope that people would not do it put there is the possibility that some will do it in the U.S. I believe there should be a group that will rule on special conditions and there should be ban on all others. Well I hope that the bill will move fast thru Congress on this issue.
Avishag Cohen of Sydney, Austarlia, comments:
As time moves forward, and knowledge expends, so does our concerp of morality. Who is to say that to create another being - not thru the womb is not moral. Everyday hundreds of children are being conceived, and others aborted - why does the "playing god" issue not come into that? perhaps if we built alters and asked god - God will tell us to stop increasing the population... maybe not... However, even if playing god did come in to it, then still morals should not become institutionalized, should not become stagnent. that is something that dictators do. let the comunity decide what is best.
Joshua D. Logan of Virgilina, VA, comments:
I have lately noticed how quickly and rapidly science and technology are advancing. Advances such as "Human Cloning". When humans are born, they are given their own traits such as look and opinion. I believe that to have your own personality and traits is a God given right. But when cloning, the cloned human is at a disadvantage because that child will never feel special (in a sense that he or she is the only person like theirself). This message may be hard to understand since writing this is a touchy subject. Thank you for allowing my input into the matter.
Lester B. Marshall of Angleton, TX, comments:
It seems like everyone is taking a position against human cloning before they have taken the time to see what the benefits to society are, or could be.
If a new heart for a patient could be cloned, or an arm, liver, kidney, eye, ect.; wouldn't that be better than trying to transplant. Fewer complications and problems with rejection would mean a healthier patient. And everyone would be his/her own donor.
Regulating the use of cloning rather than an outright ban would be a better approach.
I think banning it would also lead to a potential black market and related problems.
Thomas Scanlon of South Bend, IN, comments:
I feel that human cloning research should continue. If the technology had been around 6-7 years ago, my wife and I could have possibly had another child. We had tried medications for fertility without success.
Luz Yabar of Rockville, MD, comments:
Is there nothing sacred anymore? How can we even begin to think about experimenting with human life?
Support the kind of journalism done by the NewsHour...Become a member of your local PBS station. PBS Online Privacy Policy
Copyright ©1996- MacNeil/Lehrer Productions. All Rights Reserved.
