At present, there are technical risks in animal somatic cell cloning technology that are difficult to predict and eliminate, which has become an important scientific basis for people to oppose human cloning at the ethical level.
Cloning people will be more risky.
Whether scientists or the general public, they always compare the development prospects of human cloning research from the current situation of animal cloning technology, and take this as the logical basis for further inference. In other words, the current animal cloning experiment is still in the primary stage, and the cloning technology is still very immature. There will be some problems in human cloning research, such as high failure rate, high risk, a large number of recombinant eggs, a large number of deformed offspring, rejection in animal cloning experiments and so on. It is wrong, or at least not rigorous, to judge the universal feasibility of cloning technology only by a successful animal cloning case. Scientists believe that it is not easy to apply the technical experience gained from animal (such as sheep) cloning experiments to human individuals. When this immature technology "stubbornly" acts on the human body, the process of human cloning will be full of various dangers. For example, wilmot, a British embryologist, believes that there are many reasons to think that the human cloning experiments announced by zavos and Antinori will have the same high failure rate, just like when trying to clone animals. Moreover, at present or in the foreseeable future, there is no feasible technical method to check the development of all genomes of animal embryos. Therefore, people can't guarantee whether the embryo finally implanted in the uterus can develop normally, so as not to give birth to deformed children or seriously threaten the safety of surrogate mothers.
In addition, at the International Human Genome Conference held in Shanghai in 2002, Academician Zhu Chen, Vice President of China Academy of Sciences, pointed out that it was British scientists who stood out against human cloning first, because experts knew best that the current technology was far from human cloning. ..... Dolly's success in cloning sheep has experienced the twists and turns of 277 failed cloned sheep experiments, and deformed people and deformed people emerge one after another. If this scene repeats itself when human beings are cloned, who will be responsible for the premature death of 277 lives? In addition, the premature aging phenomenon of cloned animals was also found, which can not be explained so far. Nevertheless, human cloning in a hurry is likely to lead to a big mistake. Judging from Academician Zhu Chen's remarks, he also used animal cloning as a metaphor for human cloning in the future. Chinese and foreign scientists have repeatedly observed the development of cloning technology with Dolly's situation, indicating that there is no more empirical evidence in this field to explain the nature of the problem and the size of technical risks.
2. Human cloning violates social ethics.
It is impossible for the scientific community to be indifferent to the accusations of human cloning ethics in society. Scientists affected by this also expressed similar views, such as Enrique, president of the World Medical Association? Accorsi issued a statement on August 8, 20001year, pointing out that the application of cloning technology to human beings "violates human values, ethics and moral principles". On behalf of the World Medical Association, he resolutely opposes the human cloning experiment plan. [5] From another perspective, wilmot told the media: "Imagine that my wife lives with me and a replica of me, which will produce a very unusual relationship, which will make everyone very embarrassed, especially the replica of me. Therefore, we must resolutely oppose human cloning. " 〔6〕
Of course, scientists are not ethicists, sociologists and jurists. It is impossible for them to make a systematic and traceable theoretical analysis of human cloning from the perspectives of ethics, sociology and law. But as realistic social members, they must have similar feelings with other social members on the issue of "human cloning". In this way, it is normal for the scientific community to oppose human cloning research from the perspective of social ethics.
3. Human cloning violates scientific ethics.
(1) Scientific ethics and social responsibility of scientific and technological workers
Morality belongs to a kind of social consciousness, which is the sum total of norms and norms that regulate people's behavior under certain social conditions. Engels once pointed out: "Every stage, even every industry, has its own morality." [7] As we know, the ancient Hippocratic Oath, as a professional oath of medical groups, requires practitioners to do their best to treat patients with knowledge and ability, not to have excessive medical behavior, and to adhere to character and moral norms. Then, in the process of research, development and application of science and technology, people are also required to abide by certain moral principles.
The social function of modern science and technology is more and more powerful, and its penetration into society is more and more extensive, which is more likely to cause more social, ethical and legal problems. The social responsibility of scientific and technological workers is more prominent and important than before. The arguments of "science for science's sake" and "science does not consider utility or interest" are out of date, and scientific and technological workers must make rational analysis and judgment on a series of issues such as "what kind of knowledge should be pursued", "where should the pursued knowledge be placed" and "how to apply this knowledge". These problems have long attracted the attention of the scientific community. On July 1955 and 15, 52 Nobel Prize winners, including Born, Heisenberg and Madame Curie, reflected on the social value of science and technology in the Manau Declaration, saying: "We happily contribute everything to serve science. We believe that science is the road to human happiness. However, we are horrified to see that it is this science that provides human beings with the means to commit suicide. " 〔8〕
Scientific and technological workers have the freedom and right to innovate. However, the freedom of scientific research never means doing whatever you want, and scientific and technological workers should bear corresponding social responsibilities for this innovation. Scientific and technological workers should not only care about their own research interests, but also care about the social functions and social impacts of science and technology. This is not only a strong demand for scientific and technological workers in modern society, but also a historical mission that scientific and technological workers should shoulder. In fact, after Dolly was born in 1997, two famous academic journals, Nature and Science, not only reported scientific papers related to cloning technology research, but also published a large number of scientists' comments, such as Cloning: People Will Be Next, Don't Clone People, Risk and Uncertainty, Textual Research on Dolly and This fully shows that the scientific community is concerned about the social risks brought by the development of cloning technology. Today, scientists who care about the future of mankind should pay attention to ethical, legal and social issues related to cloning, and ensure that cloning knowledge and technology serve the society, rather than endangering human society. As J.D. Watson, a famous molecular biologist who won the Nobel Prize, said, "It can be expected that many biologists, especially those engaged in asexual reproduction research, will seriously consider its significance and start scientific discussions to educate people all over the world. " 〔9〕
In the scientific field, when a technology causes controversy in society, it has become a norm that scientific and technological workers should put social interests first to evaluate this technology. It also requires scientific and technological workers to pay more attention to the social value of the selected topics when they are engaged in scientific research, rather than just engaging in research under the action of some curiosity or interest, and even less engaging in research objectives aimed at "grandstanding" or "strangeness", such as cloning human beings to "revive" the dead or "human-animal cell fusion". In 2002, wilmot emphasized that he had never considered conducting human cloning experiments since conducting animal cloning experiments. Human cloning experiment will not only make the subjects take great risks, but also the experimental results have no scientific significance, and there is no reason to do so either ethically or medically. 〔 10〕
(2) It is irresponsible to conduct biological experiments blindly.
People often talk about a biotechnology research case related to the social responsibility of scientific and technological workers: in the early 1970s, Professor Berg of Stanford University in the United States artificially synthesized the first recombinant DNA hybrid molecule. Soon, his scientific colleagues reminded him that recombinant DNA molecules may cause cancer, and bacterial reproduction with recombinant molecules may also become a medium for spreading human tumors, causing serious adverse consequences in society. Professor Berg accepted the advice of his peers and stopped his own research on gene recombination. He also appealed to scientists all over the world in the journal Nature that gene amplification experiments that may cause cancer should be stopped automatically before the potential harm of recombinant DNA molecules is clarified or appropriate protection measures are found. These discussions led the US government to issue "Guidelines for the Study of Recombinant DNA Molecules" in 1976, which strictly controlled the research and application of transgenic technology. Subsequent scientific practice proved that Berg and others overestimated the danger of transgenic technology. As long as people strictly control, properly manage, take seriously and take strict preventive measures in the process of research and experiment, these potential hazards can be completely avoided. Therefore, the American government resumed the research on gene recombination in 1979. [1 1] This scientific debate involving the social benefits and risks of biotechnology has far-reaching practical significance. This is not only the conscious embodiment of scientific and technological workers' sense of social responsibility, but also a reasonable procedure to deal with the unknown risks of new technologies. In order to avoid the possible harm caused by new technology, we should make necessary management plans and ethical norms, and temporarily stop those experiments whose consequences are not clear. This idea of choosing scientific research topics from the overall interests of human society is not only a scientific choice, but also a moral choice.
Many scientists believe that there is nothing wrong with conducting biological experiments for proper purposes, but Antinori and others' human cloning behavior is irresponsible. As long as the safety of somatic cell nuclear transfer technology is uncertain, as long as people have not fully discussed the moral issues related to human cloning, and whether infertile couples can find other methods of pregnancy, it is an irresponsible act, even a criminal act, to persist in this technical activity knowing that it will cause some "harm" and "risk" to the parties concerned.
(3) It is inconsistent with the rigorous scientific spirit.
What should people think about human cloning research and related reports? Many scientists criticized that Antinori and others' research not only ignored all kinds of risks in the current animal cloning research, but also failed to provide convincing evidence and did not explain what specific technology was used for scientific evaluation. Antinori's words and deeds of human cloning are only published through the mass media, which is inconsistent with the rigorous and realistic scientific spirit, but gives people the feeling of "putting on a show". Richard, editor of the American Journal of Medical Ethics? "I don't think Antinori has ever considered the interests of future generations," Nicholson said. What he did was just to win personal prestige, and he insisted on this controversial experiment for his reputation. " [12] Some scientists urged Antinori and others to clarify whether the relevant news is true.
In fact, many people in the scientific community have seriously questioned the human cloning movement. For example, logically, Arthur of the University of Pennsylvania? Professor Kaplan said: "Those scientists claim that there are more than 200 couples waiting in line, waiting to be taken to a remote place for artificial insemination with cloned cells, and then they will take care of every successful pregnant woman. All this sounds incredible. " Technically, Mark, director of reproductive endocrinology at a medical center in new york? Saul once told Sid that he wanted to clone human beings: "It's hard to imagine doing it in an outpatient clinic, except causing a sensation." [13] As the "chief scientist" of cloning assistance, Boicel has no academic background in medicine and biology, and has never published any research papers related to cloning technology. In this case, how should she conduct human cloning research? I want to ask, where is the credibility of the birth news of "clone" they released? [14] Here, we agree with Mr. Zhou, a well-known scholar in China: "I doubt all too noisy undertakings and all too ostentatious feelings, which always remind me of Shakespeare's satire on life:' full of voices and fanaticism, but nothing'". [15] Scientific research should not only be a very lively occupation, but also need loneliness, loneliness and tranquility.
(4) Oppose profiting from human cloning.
An important driving force of the human cloning movement is the commercial attempt and potential huge profit space of human cloning imagined by some people. At present, it is not excluded that people engaged in human cloning experiments try to profit from it. As Accorsi, president of the World Medical Association, pointed out about the human cloning plan announced by Antinori, the human cloning plan in the world involves many "economic benefits". These plans try to turn cloning technology into "big business" and pursue "simple commodity achievements" through experiments. Therefore, we should resolutely oppose the intention of using human cloning as a profit-making means that violates scientific ethics.
Because even the best cologne technology may fail, which is also recognized by researchers. Cologne's technology is to condone this possibility of failure. If it fails, it will hurt Cologne people, and the researchers are too confident and should bear criminal responsibility.
Richard feynman, an American scientist who won the 1965 Nobel Prize in Physics, said that science is a key to heaven, but it will also open hell.
The main point is that human cloning has the legal subject qualification of a natural person, which brings chaos to society. It is illegal for human cloning researchers to be suspected of intentional homicide and injury. The right of guardianship and custody of the clone is not protected, and the rights of life, health and personality of the clone are not protected. The study of human cloning is an inducement for further crimes, which violates the unchangeable ethics of human beings and is also a trap for human beings.
Recently, the leader of a cult organization in the world threw out an amazing news and publicly declared that they had created human clones. In addition, on May 30th, 20001year, the scientific edition of Southern Weekend published an article about human cloning, in which some scientific circles in China expressed their support for human cloning. In the past year, human cloning has become a hot topic in all walks of life. When there are different opinions, I think it is due to the limitation of knowledge or other reasons. They don't understand the legal problems in the production of human cloning. Today, I can't be silent for a moment about my long-standing view of human cloning. I think, if we don't say no to cloning in the name of law, maybe many people will still have confused, naive and even ignorant illusions about cloning and become the deceived objects of scientific lunatics with ulterior motives. Just as the devil in The Lord of the Rings was about to resurrect and terror was about to strike, the villagers made unforgettable noise and revelry. This makes me very uneasy, because from a legal point of view, supporting human cloning research is a dangerous direction, and the law opposes human cloning!
This paper analyzes the illegality and criminality of human cloning research from the legal point of view, and what is the subject nature and civil legal status of human cloning if it appears. Because of my shallow knowledge, I have some omissions, but I hope to awaken the souls of those "ignorant" intellectuals who are shouting for the research on human cloning, and I also hope that the majority of law colleagues will think deeply about this and make useful efforts with me to resist the research on human cloning.
Human cloning is a person, not a thing.
People are willing to look at the research of human cloning optimistically, largely because some people will take the genes extracted from the research of human cloning as objects, or as experiments without human rights. When everyone engaged in human cloning research easily ignores the understanding of the main essence of human cloning, the research of this project will be as active as the research of plague vaccine on animals. Are clones human? I think clones are of course human beings. Because the research on human cloning only breaks through the tradition of human sexual reproduction and uses the means of asexual reproduction. This kind of research itself is to overcome the means of intangible reproduction, and its purpose is to create a life as intelligent as human beings. Even though its embryo generation mode is different, the physiological function of cloned human is completely different from that of human. Therefore, whether from the general point of view or from the legal point of view, human cloning is human. As we know, even the unconscious vegetative or mental patients are natural persons. People's subjective qualifications, rights and abilities are not restricted or deprived because they have full capacity for behavior, and their natural rights, social rights and legal rights are equal. Based on this, it is believed that all clones should have the same civil rights as natural persons. In other words, they should have the right to life, health, property, sexual inviolability, work, education, and even the right to vote and get married.
Some extremists may say that human cloning is not a person but a species, or a robot in a fantasy movie, just like the terminator in an American movie. This answer is extremely cruel, reminiscent of Japan's 73 1 unit. They call people experiments. It is the devil's logic to treat people as experiments. Killing people is not killing people, but experiments. If so, what is the difference between the fate of human cloning and the fate of animals in human hands? Therefore, human cloning will have no right to life and health. Cloning people will be deprived of their lives without legal permission. Human cloning will become a genetic product and can be traded at will. Just think, if this is the case, wouldn't human society regress to a more cruel state than slave society, and all mankind would fall into slaughter and plunder, and the terrible world in the movie would surely become a reality. Because no one can tell a clone from a natural person. As long as there is an excuse that you are a clone, its fate can be as terrible as that of slaughtered livestock.
Human cloning brings social chaos to the legal subject.
The subject of legal adjustment can be divided into real subject and virtual subject. There are several virtual subjects, such as countries, international organizations, corporate entities and political parties, but there is only one real subject, that is, natural persons or citizens. In the world where there is only one real subject type, intricate unfairness and injustice appear one after another. Imagine that if there is a clone, it means that there is another real subject in the world, and the world where two real subject types coexist will inevitably lead to more chaos.
The purpose of human cloning research is not beneficial to human beings.
The research on human cloning will not bring about the progress of human values. A person's value lies not in his physical condition, skin color and figure, but in how to educate him. A natural person will certainly not have high social value if his social education is unsuccessful the day after tomorrow. Since morality and social education determine the fate of mankind, what is the significance of human cloning research?
Logical contradiction of human cloning research
Human cloning cannot be reduced or denied because of different embryo methods. However, it is not right to treat human cloning as a human being, which is a contradiction. If human cloning is regarded as human, then in the research of human cloning, in the process of progress as a technical means, researchers will inevitably destroy the life of human cloning. There is no doubt that this is not a research but a crime.
What rational person would support a research whose main cost is killing people? What is even more frightening is that this research result will bring more crimes and disasters to mankind. This is a technological progress that makes mankind go extinct!
Human cloning research is illegal.
The process of human cloning has a serious harm to the life and health of human cloning, which violates the spirit of the Constitution and criminal law. As far as China is concerned, the country implements family planning, and the natural production of human beings is restricted. Why should we conduct another population production experiment? Moreover, China's population has a strong natural reproductive capacity, so there is absolutely no need to create a population through cloning. Therefore, the research on human cloning in China is against the family planning law.
Harmfulness of the research process of human cloning
From the experiment of animal cloning, the survival rate of cloned species is very low. In the cloning experiment of Dolly sheep, only one of 277 embryos survived by fusion, and the success rate was only 0.36%. Many cloned calves were lucky to be born, and many of them soon died of heart abnormalities, uremia or dyspnea. Some cloned animals show physiological or immune defects after birth. Blood oxygen content and growth factor concentration are lower than normal; Abnormal development of thymus, spleen and lymph glands.
Now we can see that compared with normal reproduction, most of the life produced by cloning is disabled and premature. It is conceivable that in the process of making human clones, there will be all kinds of disabled humans, or disabled embryos, or disabled babies. At this time, will crazy scientists assume the responsibility of raising these human lives? I'm afraid no one will believe it.
Criminal responsibility of human cloning researchers
Scientists' behavior of creating human clones has the criminal characteristics of intentional homicide and intentional injury. Intentional crime can be divided into direct intention and indirect intention. Direct intention refers to the active pursuit of knowing the inevitability of the result of behavior. Indirect intention refers to knowing that an act may produce a result that harms society, and letting this result happen in the act.
The research on human cloning may cause death or disability, and it is almost inevitable. Actors engage in this kind of research with subjective knowledge, because their actions will inevitably or very likely lead to the death or even disability of cloned human life, so this is the crime of intentional homicide and intentional injury, but it is only a special type. Judging from the subjective mentality and the foresight of the consequences, scientists who conduct human cloning research at least commit indirect crimes and intentional crimes. There are many ways to murder. For example, there are crimes of killing people with a knife immediately and crimes of killing people through long-term drug poisoning. For a disabled child born normally, this kind of physical disability cannot be attributed to someone's criminal behavior, because a disabled child born normally is unpredictable. However, for scientists who study human cloning, it is precisely because they know and use a special behavior that it leads to the death or disability of newborns, so they should bear the same criminal responsibility as intentional homicide and intentional injury.
Human cloning brings confusion to civil legal relations.
First, human cloning has no guardian.
After a natural person is born normally, there are usually parents as legal guardians. When their parents evade the responsibility of guardianship and upbringing, they will not only be morally condemned, but also be investigated for civil liability. As clones, who are their parents is a very important question. The original cloning technology is basically a continuation of sexual reproduction, including sperm donors and egg donors, and theoretically parents. But now, the cloning technology of somatic cell nucleus has appeared, and asexual reproduction is basically mature. A cloned human is basically a gene copy of a somatic cell nuclear donor, but the somatic cell nuclear donor may be of the same age, so the somatic cell donor who should be the father ethically may not be able to do it in age and behavioral ability.
In essence, no matter what kind of technology, it is difficult for clones to find their parents. Maybe their parents don't even know each other. They are just a "research achievement" of researchers.
It is also possible that a surrogate mother will give birth to a clone. It is also difficult whether the surrogate mother of human cloning has the obligation to be her guardian. Because the child born to the surrogate mother may not have any blood relationship with herself, since there is no blood relationship, the surrogate mother cannot be required to undertake the obligation of custody and support. Because cloning technology has reached the level of parthenogenesis, cloned human beings can't even enjoy the treatment of illegitimate children, and they are completely orphans after birth.
Let's imagine how cruel it is for a person with physical function and social status defects. Who will care about him, who will educate him, and how can we shape him into a person who is beneficial to society? Perhaps, the life of a clone is not as lucky as that of a real animal. Animals and birds are born to be fed by their mothers, and human clones have been victims and experiments since their birth. People think that the perception of cloned people is the same as that of human beings. They are also afraid of pain, loneliness, bloodshed and death. They need affection, friendship and love, but how can they get all this?
Because there is no guardian, the relationship between the surrogate and the researcher can be a commercial contract. After giving birth to a child, you can pay the "goods" after a certain period of time. How do researchers use these lives at this time? They may produce the next generation for customers, or they may be replicas. But they can also dispose of these humans at will for their own criminal purposes or for the criminal purposes of their clients. All this will be more casual, because clones have no parental supervision.
Second, the right of personality and honor of human cloning.
People are social, so are human clones. Parents who want to clone their children undoubtedly want a child who can stand on his own feet in society. However, due to the special background of human cloning, his health cannot be guaranteed. Due to the innate problems of health and immunity, cloned human beings are prone to infectious diseases and mental diseases, which have caused his health to be violated from birth, and this violation is completely man-made. Because of illness, it is naturally difficult for ordinary people around to accept human cloning. How can a clone who can't integrate into society realize the value of a normal person? If human cloning doesn't even have the happiness that ordinary people should enjoy, or even the degree that ordinary people are recognized by society, what is the value of research? Isn't such a child more worrying and painful for parents? A clone who is not recognized by society, how can his right of personality and honor be respected?