The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
0 Points

Ban Human Cloning

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/13/2014 Category: Science
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 887 times Debate No: 49016
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (0)




Background: Human cloning is essentially the scientific manufacturing of an artificial twin of a person who is or was alive. This is accomplished by taking tissue from the original person and growing it into another human being during the natural reproduction process. (

P1: The biggest issue with human cloning is that there are simply too many unknowns with the process and outcome and negative effects regarding our lack of knowledge. For instance, Dr. Griffin, the man responsible for the cloned sheep Dolly, stated "there are dozens of unknowns with even sheep [and] there are certainly going to be vastly more with humans." And the effects of this are devastating and far reaching. An example of which is the cloning technique success rate, which is less than 1%, which appears to be a constant success rate among cloning attempts. ( And the effects of science's lack of knowledge continue as cloning has resulted in the "death of many embryos and newborns" and no assurance that the clone will develop in a natural manor. (

P2: Another major drawback to cloning is that it leaves everyone with the same genes, which allows for the easier spread of diseases and other issues. This decrease in gene diversity leads to the weaken of "adaptations, which make us subjected to great diseases [more] easily." In other words, the differences that give some of us the ability to fight or end diseases would not be present putting the population at risk of losing massive amounts of people due to disease and other pathogens. Another extension to this is the negative effects of inbreeding, which includes the continuance of the spread of diseases among families as well as a higher population of disease barring subjects. (

C: Because of the effects of the unknowns with cloning and the effects the lack of gene diversity will cause human cloning should be banned.


p1: What scientists do is to explore the unknown. We can just ban human cloning simply because there are too many unknown and the fear of negative effects.

p2: Allow human cloning does not necessarily makes everybody end up with the same genes because it would not just completely replace the natural human reproduction process. Therefore, it won't allows for the easier spread of diseases. [Pro's premise 2 may contain a strawman fallacy. Human cloning may cause some people to have the same genes, but it is very unlikely that everyone would have the same genes.]

p3. Human cloning can use to produces embryonic stem cells, which can cure so many diseases that are uncureable. And "embryonic stem cells are uniquely poised to become any cell in the body...if scientists could make these stem cells...once-untreatable conditions could perhaps be cured by replacing damaged cells with healthy ones" (

C: Therefore, we should not ban human cloning.
Debate Round No. 1


P1: It isn't a fear of negative effects, there ARE negative effects. They are tangible and very real, not merely some irrational feeling or emotion. What scientist are engaging in, in spite of their blatant lack understanding and knowledge on the subject, which has lead to such a low success rate, would cause the death of numerous, viable human embryos and fetuses. For example, using the current success rate, for every 200 embryos used to try and clone a person, only 1 cloned human might be produced. ( At the moment scientist simply do not know enough about cloning to begin testing on humans, which is clear due to their lack of success.

P2: I will correct myself, human cloning would caused the production of beings with the same genes, which allows for the easier spread disease, the continuing of hereditary issues, and the easier spread of pathogens due to the lose of gene diversity and a lessened ability for people to adapt. But, the fact remains that cloning creates carbon copies of organisms, right down to the gene level. Ergo, they are exactly the same and when something is the same they are not different, therefore gene diversity is lessened, which means that if the original person is effective from a disease or suffers from some sort of genetic disorder or abnormality so to will the clone. Therefore, diseases and hereditary health issues will increase with cloning. (

P3: The use of cloning to make embryonic stem cells is wrong on a number of levels which tie into previously discussed failings of cloning. For starters, because of the less than 1% success rate of cloning the process itself would be detrimental to the production of stem cells as this would lead to the death of the original embryo and no cloned embryo. Furthermore, the use of cloned embryos for their stems cells destroys the embryo, which is morally and ethically wrong as this is a death sentence with no trail, no jury, and no defense to an organism that will develop into a human being. ( I cannot think of something more wrong than to develop an embryo, that could one day live a life, merely to kill it and harvest its parts for the betterment of others.

C: Human cloning should be banned because of the negative effects caused by our lack of knowledge of the process and outcomes, the negative effect it would have on the population's ability to fight diseases, the fact that it would more easily cause the continuation of the spread of hereditary ailments, and the moral and ethical dilemmas of using it for stem cell research.


p1: Because there are lack of understanding and knowledge on the human cloning, if we ban the human cloning, there would be no way for scientists to do research and study, which may eventually increase the success rate and eliminate the negative effects.

p2: Unless very human reproduction process is taken over by human cloning, it is unlikely that the lose of gene diversity would become the issue. Natural human reproduction will still reproduces newborns with different genes.

p3:right now, the rate of making embryonic stem cells is not very high because we are still in the beginning of this type of technology. Allowing human cloning would help scientists to do more research about the subject. Embryonic stem cell has the great benefit in medical use. Liver failure, kidney failure, and ever cancers would be able to cure, if we would be able to produce more embryonic stem cell.
C: Human cloning should not be ban. It is beneficial to every human health, and save so many lives.
Debate Round No. 2


P1: Actually, there are ways for scientists to do research, improve on the process, and increase their success rate and that is through the continued testing using animal embryos, just like they have been doing. This is a process that is still new in the scientific world and the fact remains that they simply do not know enough about cloning as a whole, which leads to the conclusion that no human testing should occur with a success rate as low as less than 1%.

P2: Numerous sources would disagree with you on the front that the loss of gene diversity would be a non issue. For instance stated "cloning allowed the rapid spread of 'irreversible' genetic diseases," another source, the noted that cloning would "eradicate genetic variety," and stated that cloning has "led to major losses of genetic diversity" and that is just a few of the examples. The fact that natural reproduction would continue gene diversity is nothing but a red herring here, the true issues remain that the use of cloning lessens diversity and increases disease susceptibility.

P3: Right now, human cloning would destroy more embryonic stem cells than it would create, once again, a fact supported by a less than 1% success rate. From an embryonic stem cell research perspective, to allow cloning would be detrimental and irresponsible as countless viable embryonic stem cells would be unusable for the betterment of others or for use in stem cell research. Furthermore, it still does not address the huge issue of creating human life just to kill it for the use of others.

C: Therefore, human cloning should be banned due to its low success rate, numerous and detrimental unknowns, the fact that it would reduce gene diversity and increase the likelihood of the spread of disease, and is counterproductive to stem cell research.


p1: Before scientists doing cloning experiment on human, they did it with animals. Since, there is a success on animal cloning, as evidenced by Dolly the sheep, Human cloning should be what scientists really focus on rather than keep doing experiment using animal.

p2: As I stated earlier, the main purpose of human cloning is to produce stem cells that could cure so many diseases that are currently untreatable. Loss of gene diversity would only be a issue when cloning reproduction took over the natural reproduction. If we only limit human cloning for medical purpose. It would actually be a pro-life technology for women who are not able to have children.
p3: Not only for the diseases, human cloning technology can also be use to faster the recovery times or healing time by cloning injured person's own cells, still good for medicinal purpose.
C: Therefore, Human cloning should not be banned.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
No votes have been placed for this debate.