The non-fiction, rhetorical article, “Update:Cloning,” does not list its author but it is from the Facts on File:Issues and Controversies database; and, it explores the moral controversy of cloning. First the author examines the benefits of cloning by pointing out that it can possibly treat ill or injured patients; and he/she goes on to explain the questionable morals involved in the cloning method by describing the terminating of embryos. The author reaches out to the general concerned public with this article in order to give them knowledge on the subject.
Cloning is a highly disputed topic that is still in the research process. In truth cloning is a very interesting subject and could possibly prove beneficial someday. However, I completely disagree with supporters on the morality of the issue. Cloning ...view middle of the document...
It is immoral to create and then destroy an embryo just to save someone who is ill or injured. I think that what happened to the ill person happened for a reason. Maybe it is their time to die and science is yet again going too far and preventing nature from taking its course. We wouldn’t kill a newborn child just to harvest it’s organs for an ill patient. What makes cloning any different?
The author stays pretty objective throughout the article and states both the pros and the cons of the matter. The author goes on to list the advantages and benefits of cloning by giving an example with Therapeutic Cloning. “In Therapeutic Cloning, researchers use a person’s DNA to create an embryonic clone of that person. Researchers then extract so-called stem cells from that embryo, which can be used to create organs” (Pg. 1). Another improvement to the world through cloning that the author tries to prove is livestock cloning. “The first, livestock cloning, involves the cloning of farm animals, including pigs and cow, to improve the quality and quantity of the milk and meat sold throughout the world” (Pg. 1).
The author also covers the other spectrum by talking about the disadvantages in the cloning process. “Many people oppose the practice for the same reason that they oppose stem-cell research; by extracting stem-cells from embryos, researchers automatically destroy those embryos. Opponents argue that embryos are living things and should not be destroyed for the sake of science” (Pg. 3). He/she make sure to cover all issues given by not just talking about human cloning but animal cloning as well. “Additionally, many opponents argue that livestock cloning is an unnecessary technology—there is no pressing need for cloned cows and pigs—and could potentially constitute cruelty towards animals” (Pg. 2). In conclusion, I feel that the author did a good job of staying objective and covering both sides of the argument.