| | |
Back | Home | Next
Human Cloning: Some Ethical and Religious Concerns
NAEEM UD DIN KHATTACK Science and religion in their own specific spheres have been doing a lot to decrease the miseries to which the man, made of flesh and bone, is an heir. Before the advent of science, religion was the only source of knowledge helping people to find answers to the questions arising from the deep inner self. Although all of his answers could not have been answered, he was satisfied with whatever solutions, to his small number of problems, he obtained. Then the science of modern day came forward boasting to solve all the problems of the human race. But how far it has been successful is a big question mark. People are fond of heroine and morphine even in the most civilized and scientifically advanced societies of the west. Marriages are broken, forcing the kids to grow in the orphan houses and hostels without the essential ingredient of parental love and affection which is their birth right given to them by Mother Nature. Homicide, rape and other heinous crimes are still haunting the human mind. Where does the fault lie? It is, in my opinion, the hostility between the men of science and those of religion that is the root cause of many of the evils of modern civilization. Cloning is one of those formidable problems where the secular sciences, religion, ethics and the philosophy of human emotions seem to be at cross roads. Cows have been cloned from mother’s milk – human clones could be made from almost any source including salvia, milk and blood implying that human cloning will be possible without the knowledge or consent (Daily Telegraph Australia, April 28, 1999). Such alarming developments in the field of cloning pose serious challenges to religious philosophers and experts of bioethics. Today biological science has aroused formidable fears and suspicion, despite the fact that it has advanced more dramatically during the past decades and has done a lot for the human race. After the invention and use of atomic bombs, cloning is the biggest blow to the serenity of human philosophy and has provoked greater apprehensions among the masses and intellectuals at the public and state levels. The basic distrust of the idea of human cloning originates from different views of the role of sexual reproduction in addistion to its complex threat to the human dignity. Let me refresh your mind about the term clone. CLONE is a group of genetically identical cells or whole organisms derived from a single original cell or organism. Clones arise naturally in a number of ways. The body of an adult animal or plant is typically a clone of cells, having arisen by mitosis from a single cell, the fertilized egg. Within the body, a single cell may divide many times to produce a clone of cells with the same function – as, for example, when a single human lymphocyte gives rise to a group of plasma cells all of which synthesize the same kind of antibody. A group of plasma cells all of which synthesize the same kind of plant that is reproducing by vegetative (asexual) rather than sexual means. In human beings a set of identical twins represents a small clone of two individuals, both of whom originated from the same fertilized egg. There are some benefits of cloning in the agricultural and medical fields. Cloning is of actual and potential economic importance for propagating organisms without the time-consuming and expensive methods of selective breeding. Many varieties of fruit trees and flowering shrubs, for example, are produced by cloning, and the procedure is potentially applicable to the rasing of livestock Medical and biological research could benefit from having large numbers of genetically uniform laboratory animals, such as mice, available for testing or experimental uses. This research is also being done on the cloning of endangered species and even the extinct animals. Single cells are routinely cloned in laboratories simply by isolating them in a suitable culture medium and allowing their desendants to form colonies of cells. Muscle cells, pigment cells, and cartilage cells, among others, have been cloned in this way. Many plants can be cloned simply by taking cuttings of leaves, stems, or roots and replanting them. Plants also have been cloned by first dissociating the cells of stems or roots and then culturing the individual cells to obtain complete plants. Such direct methods are however, not possible for the more evolved animal with a higher degree of specialization of the cells. Small clones of adult frogs have been obtained by transplanting the nuclei had been removed and allowing the eggs to develop in ordinary pond water. To be more lucid, a clone in an individual organism that is grown from a single body cell of its “parent” and that they are almost absolutely identical genetically. Thus more sophisticated methodology is employed. On the same pattern, British researchers led by Ian Wilmut at the Roslin Institute in Edinburgh, in 1996, produced a lamb called Dolly. In their procedure, a nucleus of the mammary gland cell was implanted in another sheep’s egg whose nucleus had been removed. Such techniques imply that younger twins of an animal can be produced, thus a single person can donate cells in thousands and millions to be used for making the enormous number of clones. This is a starting aspect of the enormous potential of cloning, In simple words, a single man can become “parent” to a million clones resembling him in every aspect except the age. So armies of millions can be produced; all identical and of the same age. The cloning of human beings is a subject fraught with ethical and moral controversy. One set of those problems requires us to imagine scientists cloning children to harvest organs and body parts, or to create many men like Adolph Hitler (s). Definitely, there will arise crazy scientists willing to do those things. If cloning can ensure the infinite replication of specific genetic traits, a judgment would need to be made as to what characters are desirable and therefore deserve perpetuation. Those empowered to exercise such judgment would be in a position to change the course of human organic and the resulting societal evolution. In cloning, there is but one “parent”. The usually unhappy situation of the single parent child is here wilfully panned. In case of self cloning, the “child is also one’s twin. There is the notion that a clone is just like a normal person, created with and having the same genes as the person being cloned. However, a clone will never be exactly the same as the original person. Due to different environmental factors, a clone is only kin a younger identical twin with a personality of its own. Thus, it is impossible to have multiple Einstein by cloning the cells of real Einstein. This is because man is a complex product of genes and environment, and none of them alone can produce the desired results. Some scientists even argue that cloning is a sort of contamination of the human gene pool. Although the creation of entire person for the harvesting of organs is brutal and this goes against the rights of the clone, however with new technology scientists are finding ways to create entire separate organs and tissues such as heart, nerve etc. such organs will be developed from taking a cell from patient owns tissue and therefore would not cause any immune rejection problem. Another benefit of cloning is that it can give couples that cannot reproduce a chance to have children who are biologically related to them. Today in many advanced countries foetuses are screened for genetic abnormalities, with the option of abortion for those with defects. But won’t we loose in this way many Helen Keller, Taimor Lanesand Napoleons by rejecting an embryo with some defect. Human cloning has enormous implications for the present as well as for the coming generations of humanity. The danger of abuse is always there; for example, clones may be raised in specifically designed circumstances, later to be used for subversive and antihuman activities. This procedure can be employed to form mindless armies, which can be used ruthlessly against the enemy country. The cloned armies will endanger the very existence of less developed nations on the surface of earth. The cloned soldiers, even if they die like flies will not arouse any unrest in masses since they will not have any blood relation with them. Moreover the world would move back to the age of human slavery by the lucrative business of manufacturing and marketing of clones. And in this regard the condition of a female human clone will be miserable. They will be human beings but would be treated as mechanical robots. The problem of cloning, if not dealt with intelligently, will create enormous chaos and may endanger the very existence of human race in the near future. Our religion, Islam, shows us the path of moderation in all walks of life. It forbids the crossing of certain limits. I think the human cloning is one of those limits and this needs to be dealt with extreme caution. Science as conceived by a modern materialist is based only on secular rationality; there is no room for emotions, mysticism and religion. He says that the universe is Godless and there is no greater cause of existence other that to eat drink and have sex. But such thinking produces shallowness so huring that nothing but doping can give him peace. They have depressions manias and various types of psychosis. In my opinion the desire for immediate results makes such people blind to the fruits of mysticism and religion which in the long run will prove to be the ultimate reality and the absolute truth. My personal belief is that one day all the sciences will end up believing in religion because, He (God) is before every thing, and by him all things exist. REFERENCES - Betzig, L.. et al.. eds., Human Reproductive Behaviour (Cambridge 1988).
- Brinsden, Peter R, and Paul A. Rainsbury, A Textbook of In- Vitro Fertilizat and Assisted Reproduction (Patthenon Pub. Group 1992).
- Droegemueller, W., et al., Comparative Gynaecology, 2d ed. (Mosby-Year Bk. 1991).
- Edwards, R. G., Conception in the Human Female (Academic Press 1980).
- Hull, R.. ed.,Ethical Issues in New Reproductive Technologies (Wadsworth PuW 2000).
- Jones, Richard E., Human Reproductzan and Sexual Behavior (Prentice-Hall 1984).
- Lenhofi H., Conception to Birth (Kendall/Hunt 1989).
- Masters, William H., and Virginia E. Johnson, Human Sexual Response (Bantam 1981).
- Masfroiamii, Luigi, Jr., and Calvin A. Paulsen, eds.. Aging, Reproduction And the Climacteric (Plenum Press 1986).
- Speroft Leon, et al., Clinical Gynaecologic, Endocrinology and Infertility (Williams & Wilkins 1989).
- Arber, Werner, et a! Genetic Manipulation: Impact on Man and Society (Cambridge 1984).
- Bajaj. Y. P., ed., Plant Protoplast and Genetic Engineering (Springer-Verlag 1989).
- Old R. W., and S. B. Primrose, Principles of Gene Manipulation (Blackwell 1985)
- Walton, A. G., and S. K. Hammer, eds., Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology: Year book , 2 vols. (Elsevier Pub. Co. 1999).
- Williams, J. and R. K. Patient, Genetic Engineering (Oxford 1988).
Back to Top
Lecturer in Zoology, Govt Superior Science College, Peshawar Back to Table of Contents
| | |