HUMAN CLONING

The potential for human cloning is a contentious issue in the fall of 2003. The issue is controversial in most societies; however, the debate is especially acrimonious in the North America (Maienschein 5).

Various opponents and proponents of human cloning establish their positions from a variety of perspectives. Some positions on each side of the issue are expressed in very narrow and rigid terms, while other positions on each side of the issue tend toward the careful examination of opposing arguments before refuting them from differing philosophical perspectives (Szoke 6).

Regardless of the specific justification offered for the various positions on the practice of human cloning, however, theories and principles of ethics provide the essential character of all of the positions. The theory of results-based ethics (frequently referred to as "consequentialism" or "utilitarianism") underlies the position of the scientist who contends that human cloning must be permitted because the practice will advance human knowledge, as well as the position of the medical researcher who contends that human cloning is justified because it will facilitate the development of life-saving medical procedures. Similarly, the theory of standards-based ethics (frequently referred to as "deontology" or "duty ethics") underlies various positions opposing the practice of human cloning. The position of the priest w

. . .
se different people may adhere to different sets of moral rules. Deontologists contend that moral rules are independent of individual judgement because the inherent logic of such rules causes them to be impossible to contradict (Ross 156). As valid as this argument may be, it does not persuade adherents of utilitarian ethics that they should abandon their arguments. The ethical system of natural law holds that actions are ethically correct when they are in accord with the end purpose of human nature and human goals. Thus, the "do good and avoid evil" maxim of natural law ethics encompasses the ethical principles of beneficence and nonmaleficence. Even within the system of natural law ethics, however, conflicts may arise in decision-making because a theist will conceive human nature and human goals in one way, while a non-theist may conceive of those concepts in a quite different way (Dinc 242). In the contemporary period, utilitarianism and deontology tend to command the greatest level of attention in ethical considerations of social issues. In quite general terms, utilitarian philosophy evaluates the acceptability of actions in the context of their outcomes. Thus, an evaluation of an outcome ù a consequence ù as good woul
. . .

Some common words found in the essay are:
ES Cell, America Maienschein, William Sound, Jeremy Bentham, World War, Bioethicists Edwards, human cloning, Stuart Mill, Online Vol, OPPOSING PRACTICE, rule utilitarianism, utilitarian-based law, utilitarian philosophy, moral rules, human cloning procedure, Legaldate Vol, cloning procedure, proponents human cloning, therapeutic human, development utilitarian-based, oil spill, proponents human, development utilitarian-based law, therapeutic human cloning, contends human cloning,
Approximate Word count = 2377
Approximate Pages = 10 (250 words per page)

More Essays on HUMAN CLONING