Should we use Cloning as much as we do.
Debate Rounds (3)
This is a highly inaccurate statement, as cloning is today a very controversial practice. It is highly difficult to achieve and is used mostly in genetic studies. My question is, why does the 'ratio of failure' mean we shouldn't clone? Just because something is hard doesn't mean the scientific community has ever stopped trying.
Cloning has many benefits. For one, it can save the lives of patients suffering from rare or incurable diseases. For example, many patients with leukemia require a bone marrow transplant. This requires that someone donate their marrow (it doesn't hurt them - they can grow more). However, it is extremely hard to find someone who is an exact match. Even your own sibling only has a 25% chance of having a match! In this instance, we don't even have to clone a full human - we just need to clone some healthy cells, then replant them into the patient. This is a way to save a person's life.
Some argue that cloning shouldn't be allowed because it 'isn't natural'. However, cloning happens every day in organisms all over the world. It's known as asexual reproduction. This can take many forms, but the most common is when a single-celled organism splits in half after duplicating its chromosomes. The two resulting cells (daughter cells) are exact copies of the original cell. This is an example of cloning in the natural world. Perhaps humans don't reproduce asexually, but cloning cannot be considered 'wrong' or 'unnatural' if it is found every day, in organisms you may not even think of.
Thank you for your time.
robxav123 forfeited this round.
No votes have been placed for this debate.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.