Congress and Human Cloning :: Argumentative Persuasive Topics

Congress and homo Cloning   This year Congress whitethorn face several decisions that could second forge, in the words of Pope seat Paul II, the path to a truly tendere future, in which world remains the master, non the product, of his engine room (Address to President Bush at Castel Gandolfo, July 23). The set-back and most immediately urgent of these decisions regards human re-create.   The Weldon/Stupak Human Cloning barrier Act, approved 18-to-11 by the suffer Judiciary Committee, is poised for a vote by the full Ho occasion. It should be approved without delay. Some researchers have already announced that they are toilsome to make a live-born child by cloning -- despite an arouse scientific consensus that about 99% of untested humans drawd by this order would die before birth, and the rare subsister would suffer from massive medical exam problems. The Weldon/Stupak circuit board reference workes this looming tragedy at its source, by banning the u se of material cellular telephone nuclear transfer to create a new existence of the human species.   This bill is carefull crafted to address only if this specific problem. It has no effect on in vitro fecundation or any another(prenominal) reproductive technology in up-to-date use, but deals only with cases of fissiparous re fruit which do not move bandaging 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 cannon cells which are not themselves human embryos).   Proponents of cloning nonetheless argue that this bill somehow interferes with a surgical procedure that is essential to radix cell research. Until now, of course, these comparable 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 dest ruction of cloned embryos to provide genetically matched stem cells will be mandatory to take stem cell research from the laboratory into the clinic.   While the cloning debate is now forcing much(prenominal) groups to admit that their earlier statements may not be true, their new adopt is also open to serious question. The discipline Institutes of Healths new report on the science of stem cells cites cloning as one way to retain rejection of embryonic stem cells as alien tissue, but cites other approaches as well -- and expresses great uncertainty as to whether these cells will provoke a significant immune reaction withal without such manipulations (NIH, Stem Cells scientific Progress and Future Research Directions, June 2001, pp.Congress and Human Cloning contentious Persuasive Topics Congress and Human Cloning   This year Congress may face several decisions that could help forge, in the words of Pope John Paul 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 fertilization or any other reproductive technology in cur rent 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 que stion. 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.