Header

State Several Ethical Legal and Moral Issues Raised by the Possibility of Human Cloning

Zoloth came to a different conclusion about reproductive cloning, based on his reading of Jewish sources. She argued that the availability of such technology would make human life a commodity too easily, with a greater emphasis on making a copy of oneself than on the crucial parental act of “creating a stranger to whom you would give your life.” She placed the issue of cloning in the context of a system in which children in foster care could not find a home and in which there was no universal health care for babies already born. Although Zoloth reported that Jewish ethicists vary widely in their views on reproductive cloning, there is a fairly broad consensus that stem cell research is warranted. Among the Jewish traditions she cited were: Therefore, cloning is prohibited to reproduce and reproduce a large group of cloned humans for war or peacetime purposes, such as: hard and overwhelming work, reproduction of people useful to society such as the genius of science, politics and the military, and to reproduce children of desired genotypes, and to replace newly deceased spouses, children or parents. In such cloning, the humanity of the reproduced human beings is not the goal, but the development of society and the satisfaction of the demands of others. It seems that cloning for the reproduction of a child for infertile couples and therapeutic cloning (provided that the beginning of humanity and human dignity is not taken into account from the moment of fertilization and conception) for the reproduction of transplanted organs are allowed, because humanity is not a mere means.29 Law and ethics are fundamental concepts in this field and according to the 4th Since there is no specific law on human cloning in the country, we should refer to accredited judicial decrees or ethics. On the other hand, on the basis of principle 177, constitutional law, it is an immutable principle and it has been constant after all the examinations. Although from a bioethical and judicial point of view, the status of reproductive and therapeutic cloning is analyzable, and the sanction is the legal status of the case to be claimed and of great importance.17 Of course, there is a difference between the three categories. The category of holiness for murder is stricter than holiness for the second and third categories. In the third, the most important rule can be applied more easily and more; That is, on the basis of this theory, it can be said that, although the destruction of embryos is prohibited if a person suffers from a serious illness and sometimes results in death, the embryo can be destroyed in relation to the greater importance of human life in order to obtain the stem cell for the treatment of the patient.48 Therefore, in order to prevent such corruption, human cloning is considered a secondary prohibition. Ayatollahs Seyed Kazem Haery, Sheikh Javad Tabrizi, Seyed Sadegh Shirazi, Yoosef Sanei and Naser Makarem Shirazi supported the statement. Ayatollah Makarem Shirazi responded to an exception in this issue: “Based on religious rules, it is not naturally banned, but in terms of its likely side effects, which can cause disruption in human society and are obvious to experts, its operation would be problematic.17 Henry “Hank” Greely, member of the State Advisory Committee on Human Cloning, addressed some of the challenges associated with the creation of a Regulatory System for the Reproductive Cloning of Human Beings.

First, he addressed safety, which clearly justifies regulation given the 5 to 10 times higher probability of spontaneous abortion in cloned sheep. The FDA has currently claimed jurisdiction over this technology, but Greely doubted that the courts would uphold this claim. Given these facts, Greely saw three alternatives for the state of California: Since cloning is not yet very common and is in the development phase and has not been tested after birth, countries with cloning technology do not have a complete and codified law for it. Human cloning can cause legal problems, including the individual reproducing completely similar to the genetic donor, even his fingerprints, and it is exclusive to everyone and is considered the main factor in arresting the perpetrator. Thus, the genetic owner can commit a crime and evade the law and attribute his action to the cloned individual or vice versa. This deprives both their rights and freedoms.31 The operation is the third stage of therapeutic cloning, which will be described below. It should be known which of the three stages of therapeutic cloning was allowed and which was not. Of course, if only one of the steps is considered prohibited, it is not possible to issue a fatwa for therapeutic cloning, which covers all stages. The authorization of therapeutic cloning is subject to the admissibility of all stages. Now let`s move on to the three stages: the first step is the use of the cell of the human body, which is not automatically opposed. If there is a problem, it is in the following steps, which have nothing to do with this step.48 Since human cloning raises serious concerns, it would be highly irresponsible to pursue this method without serious thought. As progress is made in this area, new questions will inevitably arise, and only time can decide its fate.

Until society discussed the benefits to outweigh the harm, it would be inappropriate to engage in human cloning. Lawrence Nelson, associate professor of philosophy at the SCU, opened the ethics panel with a discussion on the moral status of the human embryo. Nelson limited his remarks to viable and extracorporeal embryos (embryos created for fertility treatments that have never been implanted), arguing that these beings have a certain moral status – albeit weak – because they are alive and because they are valued to varying degrees by other moral actors. This status entitles the embryo to a certain degree of protection. According to Nelson, the sources of gametes from which the egg and sperm created these embryos have a unique bond with them and should have exclusive control over their disposition. If the gamete sources match, Nelson believes the embryos can be used for research if treated with respect.