Some of the key discussion points reported by each group were:
- To create a clone army, an army of surrogate mothers would be needed, either forced or paid money. Is such surrogacy ethical? Is any type of surrogacy such a commercial surrogacy in India morally acceptable? I feel that commercial surrogacy should be allowed as long as the rights of the surrogate mother, parent mother, and the child are protected by clear laws and contracts.
- If parents clone a dead child to replace that dead child with a living "copy," will the individuality and dignity of the cloned child be fully protected? Will the cloned child live with undesirable psychological pressure of expectations to be like the dead child? Is such an arrangement fair? As a parent, if my child dies, I can see the attraction of creating a cloned copy to replace the loss, but I would not want to destroy the memory of the original child by trying to get a child that is just like him. Respect for the individuality of both the dead child and the next child born seems in jeopardy if cloning is used.
- Is adoption a better option than cloning if a couple is unable to have a child? Will the popularization of cloning in the future disrupt the balance of how childless parents adopt parentless children? I strongly feel that adoption of orphans is a very important part of a humane society. However, at the same time, I do not see adoption as a strong reason to ban cloning as an option of reproduction.
- How is Silver's style of argumentation? Is it persuasive? He is trying to use a personal style that talks to the reader with I/you/we. He also uses several self-serving hypothetical cases like the twins who are hit by a car to make an argument. Another characteristic of his style is that he does not seem to give a very fair presentation of the opposing arguments or alternatives to cloning. Nice analysis!
0 件のコメント:
コメントを投稿