AFFIRMATIVE

Our motion today is THW ban human cloning.

From Oxford Advanced Learners Dictionary the definitions are:
Human is a person rather than an animal or a machine
Cloning is a producing a plant or an animal naturally or artificially from the cells of
another plant or animal and is therefore exactly the same as it
Now, we only talked about human cloning in this case human cloning is very harmful for human
kind. We the affirmative believe that this statement true. Human cloning is the creation of a
genetically identical copy of a human.
The latest issue that cloning of Dolly the sheep in 1997 by Ian Wilmut and his colleagues at the
Roslin Institute in Edinburgh generated a spontaneous worldwide reaction. Dr. Richard Seed, an
American geneticist, claimed he would be able to clone human beings within a year. A Korean
doctor was reported to have created, and killed, the first human clone, but was subsequently
found to have fabricated his results.. The United States has imposed a moratorium on human
cloning and a ban on federal funding of cloning research that will be reviewed every five years.
One bill to make human cloning lawful and another demanding its prohibition were both rejected
by Congress in 1999. In Britain human therapeutic cloning is legal but requires licenses,
reproductive cloning is however illegal. Germany, Switzerland and several American states have
passed laws expressly forbidding human cloning, whereas Canada and Ireland have no relevant
legislation at present. The opposition of international organisations towards human cloning
seems clear. The European Parliament, the Council of Europe, UNESCO and the WHO have all
passed resolutions asserting that human cloning is both morally and legally wrong. There is a
clear distinction between reproductive cloning and therapeutic cloning. Reproductive cloning
relates to the use of the technology with the intention to produce a foetus identical to its parent.
The technique used to produce Dolly is known as nuclear transfer, whereby the nucleus from a
somatic cell was fused with an unfertilised egg from which the nucleus had been removed. This
method of procreation is asexual, as it does not require one person of each sex in order to
produce a child. A single mother or a lesbian couple, for example, could produce a child
genetically related to them both, without the necessity for a male gamete.

And now, let me deliver my arguments. There are so many things about human cloning which are
bad for society at large.
1. Uncertain results
Though we have made remarkable progress in this field, but the cloning process of
humans has not yet been successfully tested and perfected. The making of Dolly started
with deaths of numerous embryos and new borns. One dolly came into being from 277
fused eggs, which itself indicates the grim success rate of the cloning process. If human
cloning is carried out, it may well lead to uncontrolled results, abnormal development,
genetic damage, malformation and diseases in the clone.
2. Playing God
 Cloning is playing God. It is not merely intervention in the bodys natural processes, but
the creation of a new and wholly unnatural process of asexual reproduction. Clerics
within the Catholic, Muslim and Jewish faiths have all expressed their opposition to
human cloning.
3. Cloning harm families
Reproductive cloning harms the integrity of the family. Single people will be able to
produce offspring without even the physical presence of a partner. Once born, the child
will be denied the love of one parent, most probably the father. Several theologians have
recognised that a child is a symbolic expression of the mutual love of its parents, and
their hope for the future. This sign of love is lost when a childs life begins in a
laboratory.
4. Identity crisis
If you have a clone of you existing somewhere in the world, or just next to you, it means
your identity is threatened. Your clone may do things in your name and nobody would
ever suspect it.

So ladies and gentlemen from that explanation, we can conclude that cloning has uncertainty and
unsafe results, and also have high risk of gene mutations, and inheriting abnormalities and also
disease. That is very dangerous for health, moreover if clone applied to human being.

NEGATIVE
Our motion today is THW ban human cloning.

We disagree with definition given by the opposition because there are usefulness of human
cloning. we should be very wary of banning something without knowing whats good about that.

The opposite said that human cloning is playing god this is not fully true because this argument assumes
that we know Gods intentions. Evidently, there is no biblical statement on the ethics of human cloning.
Who is to say that it is not Gods will that we clone ourselves? Hindu thought potentially embraces IVF
and other assisted reproduction technology. Moreover, every time that a doctor performs life-saving
surgery or administers drugs he is changing the destiny of the patient and could be thus seen as usurping
the role of God.

She also said that cloning harms families this is wrong because This argument is wholly unsuited to the
modern age. Society freely allows single people to reproduce sexually, whether by accident or design.
Existing lawful practices such as sperm donation allow deliberate procreation without knowledge of the
identity of the father. Surely it is preferable for a mother to know the genetic heritage of her offspring,
rather than accept sperm from an unknown and random donor? Moreover, reproductive cloning will allow
lesbian couples to have children genetically related to them both. It might be better for the welfare of the
child for it to be born into a happy relationship, but the high rates of single parenthood and divorce
suggest that this is not always possible.

I will be discussing why human cloning has many usefulness.

1. Will allow the elimination of diseases
Cloning is unlikely to be widespread so any dangers from any reduction in the diversity of the
human gene pool will be so limited as to be virtually non-existent. The expense and time
necessary for successful human cloning should mean that it will only be used to the benefit of the
small minority of people who require the technology. The pleasure of procreation through sexual
intercourse does not suggest that whole populations will prefer to reproduce asexually through
cloning. The only significant lack of diversity which can be expected will be in women who
suffer from a severe mitochondrial disease. They will be able to use cloning by nuclear transfer in
order to avoid passing on the disease which is carried in their egg cells to any offspring. This
elimination of harmful genetic traits from the gene pool is no different from the eradication of
infectious disease, such as small pox, and should be welcomed. So against these very marginal
worries there is potentially great good to be done through cloning.
2. Cloning should be allowed for those who cant otherwise have a child
The desire to have ones own child and to nurture it is wholly natural. The longing for a child
genetically related to oneself existed long before biotechnology, but it is only recently that
medicine has been able to satisfy it. In vitro fertilisation remains an imperfect technology.
Couples typically submit to four cycles of costly treatment before producing a child as the
chances of having a child can be as low as 10%. Evidently, the technique does not assist
homosexual couples, couples where both partners lack gametes, or where the female partner
suffers from a mitochondrial disease. Cloning would allow a child to be born to all these couples.
3. Clones will still be individuals
There is much more danger of eugenics associated with developments in gene therapy and genetic
testing and screening, rather than human cloning. The notion of clones of Hitler is frankly
 preposterous. Psychologists have shown that nurture is at least as important as genes in
determining personality. It would be impossible to produce another Hitler, or Elvis, or whomever,
by cloning or any other ART. Clones (people with identical genes) would by no means be
identical in every respect. You only need to look at identical twins (who are genetic clones of
each other) to see how wrong that assumption is, and how different the personalities, preferences,
and skills of people with identical genes can be.

So ladies and gentlemen from that explanation there are usefulness of human cloning so we dont
truly agree that human cloning is all bad for human being. It still could help human life.

Fera Hardiyanti

UNIVERSITAS SULTAN AGENG TIRTAYASA