Congress and Human Cloning :: Argumentative Persuasive Topics

Congress and forgiving Cloning   This form Congress may side several decisions that could help forge, in the run-in of Pope John capital of Minnesota II, the path to a truly charitable future, in which man carcass the master, not the product, of his applied science (Address to President bush-league at Castel Gandolfo, July 23). The first and more or less immediately urgent of these decisions regards human copy.   The Weldon/Stupak serviceman Cloning Prohibition Act, sanction 18-to-11 by the House Judiciary Committee, is hover for a vote by the full House. It should be approved without delay. several(prenominal) look intoers have already announce that they ar trying to produce a live-born child by copy -- despite an overwhelming scientific consensus that approximately 99% of rude(a) macrocosm created by this method would die forrader birth, and the rare survivor would get together from massive medical problems. The Weldon/Stupak bank bill addresses this looming calamity at its source, by forbidding the use of somatic cell thermonuclear transfer to create a new organism of the human species.   This bill is carefully crafted to address merely this specific problem. It has no effect on in vitro dressing or any some other reproductive technology in current use, moreover deals only with cases of asexual reproduction which do not involve fertilization of egg by sperm. The bill explicitly exempts any use of cloning technology to produce animals, plants, DNA, tissues, or cells other than human embryos (including etymon cells which are not themselves human embryos).   Prop acents of cloning notwithstanding argue that this bill someways interferes with a procedure that is essential to halt cell research. Until now, of course, these same groups were imperativeness that embryonic straw cell research could be fully engage using only excess embryos created by in vitro fertilization that result be discarded anyway. Now they hypothecate that mass production and wipeout of cloned embryos to provide genetically matched stem cells allow for be needed to take hold stem cell research from the science lab into the clinic.   While the cloning compete is now forcing such groups to admit that their former statements may not be true, their new claim is also subject to serious question. The National Institutes of Healths new report on the science of stem cells cites cloning as one way to prevent rejection of embryonic stem cells as foreign tissue, plainly cites other approaches as well -- and expresses vast uncertainty as to whether these cells pass on provoke a significant resistant reaction even without such manipulations (NIH, Stem Cells Scientific Progress and future(a) Research Directions, June 2001, pp.Congress and Human Cloning Argumentative Persuasive Topics Congress and Human Cloning   This year Congress may face several decisions that could help forge, in the words of Pope John P aul II, the path to a truly humane future, in which man remains the master, not the product, of his technology (Address to President Bush at Castel Gandolfo, July 23). The first and most immediately urgent of these decisions regards human cloning.   The Weldon/Stupak Human Cloning Prohibition Act, approved 18-to-11 by the House Judiciary Committee, is poised for a vote by the full House. It should be approved without delay. Some researchers have already announced that they are trying to produce a live-born child by cloning -- despite an overwhelming scientific consensus that about 99% of new humans created by this method would die before birth, and the rare survivor would suffer from massive medical problems. The Weldon/Stupak bill addresses this looming tragedy at its source, by banning the use of somatic cell nuclear transfer to create a new organism of the human species.   This bill is carefully crafted to address only this specific problem. It has no effect on in vitro f ertilization or any other reproductive technology in current use, but deals only with cases of asexual reproduction which do not involve fertilization of egg by sperm. The bill explicitly exempts any use of cloning technology to produce animals, plants, DNA, tissues, or cells other than human embryos (including stem cells which are not themselves human embryos).   Proponents of cloning nonetheless argue that this bill somehow interferes with a procedure that is essential to stem cell research. Until now, of course, these same groups were insisting that embryonic stem cell research could be fully pursued using only excess embryos created by in vitro fertilization that will be discarded anyway. Now they say that mass production and destruction of cloned embryos to provide genetically matched stem cells will be needed to take stem cell research from the laboratory into the clinic.   While the cloning debate is now forcing such groups to admit that their earlier statements may not be true, their new claim is also open to serious question. The National Institutes of Healths new report on the science of stem cells cites cloning as one way to prevent rejection of embryonic stem cells as foreign tissue, but cites other approaches as well -- and expresses great uncertainty as to whether these cells will provoke a significant immune reaction even without such manipulations (NIH, Stem Cells Scientific Progress and Future Research Directions, June 2001, pp.