Exploratory Draft

Thesis Statement: Many will argue that embryonic stem cell and cloning research could cause overwhelming positive outcomes and should be pursued on federal/universal levels, but there is a point where scientific advancement can go too far and require a universal legislation to limit the extent of the advancements.

Science has many numerous advances that have changed our lives drastically. We have medicine to make us better when we are ill, vaccinations to prevent us from getting ill, and technology to simplify everything. Our realm of knowledge and advancements are constantly changing and much scientific advancement is at the point where they can change the world as we know it drastically. Over the past few years science has turned to researching the use of embryonic stem cells and cloning to serve as cures or corrections to medical ailments. At this current time there is no universal legislation limiting how far science is allowed to go, but there is a need for one.

Embryonic stem cell research and cloning are very controversial issues that challenge many ethical and religious views. In the United States, we as voters play a role in deciding how far science will federally be allowed to go by electing officials that side with us, and yet each state creates their own legislation to handle the topic. Nor, is there any good by just one country limiting the advancements because those interested in perfecting this technology will just move elsewhere, like Clonaid already did. To understand the need for such a universal limit, one needs to clearly understand the matters at hand clearly. The issues of embryonic stem cell research and human cloning are very complex and cannot be completely restricted or allowed to go one without restrictions.

Embryonic Stem Cell Research is a rather new technology that can use embryonic stem cells to repair almost any part of the human body. Since the stem cell is not specified just to the brain or lungs it can be used to treat many health problems, such as: AIDS, diabetes, Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s, heart disease and more. But the controversy comes from how an embryonic stem cell is retrieved; to use the stem cell the embryo is destroyed. Rather that is right or wrong depends on when one considers life to begin. In the United States researches can only use already existing stem cell for research; they are not allowed to harvest new ones. Researchers argue that this restriction is drastically hindering the advancements they can make and possible cures they can find.

Cloning is a bit more complicated. There are three different types of cloning: tissue, organ, and human. The difference between the three is the end result, tissue cloning produces tissues, organ cloning produces organs, and human cloning produces a human embryo or a copy of a human, and is the most controversial. Within the types of cloning there are different types, there are two ways to achieve a tissue or organ clone, depending on the way used determines if it is considered ethical, by most. But, for the sake of this argument, human cloning will be the focus.

Human cloning is still considered a sci-fi fantasy to most, but the truth is that there are those in pursuit of making a human clone, and becoming closer and closer to achieving their goal. Some have issue with the idea of human cloning because of religious beliefs, they feel that creating a human clone is trying to play God, but that is not a universal valid argument against cloning. To encourage a universal ban on cloning it needs to be shown that it violates universal ethics and could drastically damage human life. In order to do this many take the approach of thinking of the clones. If clones are created, what problems will occur with them and non-cloned humans?