The physical or, for that matter, the mental similarity of two individuals does not make them one and the same individual.However, similarity, if carried to extremes, can have harmful effects on the individuals concerned.The Linacre Centre for Healthcare Ethics Human cloning and in vitro fertilisation may seem very different procedures; certainly, they are regarded very differently by many people at the present time.
The clone is not, of course, the same individual as the individual from whom he or she was cloned.
Rather, cloning can be regarded as a form of asexual reproduction.
The case of identical twins is often cited as evidence that genetic similarity is in itself innocuous (3).
It should be noted that identical twins can, in fact, experience problems in their social and personal development (Bryan 1998, pp.
The He states cloning represents "the desire to exert our will over every aspect of our surroundings." I believe we were put on the earth to be stewards and keep the earth, not to dominate every aspect of it.
(Something else) then disputes the idea as he sees every advance in human history as part of a "technological project", and asks the reader where would we be without the men who "exerted their will" over surroundings?
The difference in age, where this existed, would create problems in itself.
The clone would see the person from whom he or she was cloned acquiring certain features, whether positive or negative, and would feel him or herself in tension with this pre-existing life (Holm 1998).
Compelling arguments state that cloning of both human and non-human species results in harmful physical and psychological effects.
In "Cloning Is Moral" Alex (Something else) comes across as an advocate for therapeutic and reproductive cloning and argues that it is immoral to be against it, which I disagree.