关于反对克隆的辩论!要英语的,有翻译最好!

关于反对克隆的辩论!要英语的,有翻译最好!
关于反对克隆的辩论!要英语的,有翻译最好!

关于反对克隆的辩论!要英语的,有翻译最好!
现在科学界把克隆分为治疗性克隆和生殖性克隆两种.前者是利用胚胎干细胞克隆人体器官,供医学研究、解决器官移植供体不足问题,这是国际科学界和伦理学界都支持的,但有一个前提,就是用于治疗性克隆的胚胎不能超出妊娠14天这一界限.而对于生殖性克隆,即通常所说的克隆人,由于它在总体上违背了生命伦理原则,所以,科学家的主流意见是坚决反对的.联合国教科文组织、世界卫生组织和国际人类基因组伦理委员会和各国政府也都非常明确地表示,反对生殖性克隆
克隆羊的诞生在世界引起了轰动,主要原因有二：一是它标志克隆研究取得新的进展和重大突破,而且,“这个结果证明：动物体中执行特殊功能、具有特定形态的所谓高度分化的细胞与受精卵一样具有发育成完整个体的潜在能力.也就是说,动物细胞与植物细胞一样,也具有全能性.”二是它既可能是人类的福音,也可能成为人类的凶兆,也就是说,它既可以为人类造福,也可能给人类造成危害.
现代科技,特别是现代生命科技,要不要尊重伦理学原则,要不要倾听伦理的声音?有关专家针对一些科学狂人在美国秘密克隆人的做法指出——克隆人违背人类生命伦理.
我国多家媒体近日转载了国外媒体报道的一条惊人消息：一群受邪教组织操纵的科学狂人,正在美国内华达州大漠深处进行着一项克隆人的秘密实验.他们根据英国科学家创造世界第一只克隆羊“多利”的同样原理,从一个今年2月份夭折的10个月大的美国女婴身上提取细胞制造克隆人.据称,“如果进展顺利的话,世界上第一个克隆人将于明年年底诞生.”
消息披露后,克隆技术及其带来的伦理学问题再一次成为人们议论的热点.如果这一消息属实的话,应当如何看待此事,如何正确地评价和思考这个问题
自1997年英国罗斯林研究所成功地克隆出“多利”羊后,国外不断有人在名利的驱使下,提出并试图从事克隆人的研究.尽管各国政府明令禁止,但与克隆人有关的报道近两年来不止一次见诸报端.但是,这次速度这么快,又与邪教组织有关联,确实令人感到震惊.
痛失爱女的父母,希望通过克隆技术使女儿复活,这种心情是可以理解的.但如果科学家借此进行克隆人的实验,就值得讨论了.即使撇开邪教不谈,这种做法也是不可取的.就“克隆人”这一个体而言,他会生活在“我是一个死去的人的复制品”这样一个阴影中,这对他的心理会产生什么样的影响?
按照生命伦理学的观点,科学技术要从长远利益出发,造福整个人类.它必须遵循“行善、不伤害、自主和公正”这四项国际公认的伦理原则.“多利”羊的克隆成功经过了200多次的失败,出现过畸形或夭折的羊.而克隆人更为复杂,无疑会遇到更多的失败,如果制造出不健康、畸形或短寿的人,将是对人权的一种侵犯.
人类基因的多样性是人类进化的生物学基础,而那些科学狂人要制造的所谓“不朽的生命”,实际上是同一基因的翻版,这就有可能减少基因的多样性,不利于人类本身的进化.所以,无论从个体、整体,还是从社会进化、生命伦理角度看,都应该坚决反对克隆人的行为.
现在科学界把克隆分为治疗性克隆和生殖性克隆两种.前者是利用胚胎干细胞克隆人体器官,供医学研究、解决器官移植供体不足问题,这是国际科学界和伦理学界都支持的,但有一个前提,就是用于治疗性克隆的胚胎不能超出妊娠14天这一界限.而对于生殖性克隆,即通常所说的克隆人,由于它在总体上违背了生命伦理原则,所以,科学家的主流意见是坚决反对的.联合国教科文组织、世界卫生组织和国际人类基因组伦理委员会和各国政府也都非常明确地表示,反对生殖性克隆.即使克隆人真的诞生了,我们还是要坚持这一基本立场.
现代科学技术是一把双刃剑,在其造福人类的同时也会带来一些负面效应.这就向我们提出了一个问题：现代科技,特别是现代生命科技,要不要尊重伦理学原则,要不要倾听伦理的声音?沈教授指出：现在有些科学家提出,只要科学上有可能做到的,就应该去做.事实上,这是错误的观点.如果技术上我们能制造出一种严重危害人类的超级生命,难道也可以去制造吗?一些科学狂人正是打着“科学自由”的旗号,去做一些危害人类的事.因此,我们要警惕现代科学技术被一些别有用心的人利用.另外,也不能把科学自由和伦理道德对立起来.现代生命科学发展的事实表明,伦理的规范和引导,并没有束缚科学的发展,倾听伦理的声音,有利于科学更健康、顺利地发展.
Now the cloned into scientific therapeutic cloning and reproductive cloning of two. The former is the use of embryonic stem cells cloned organs for medical research, to solve the shortage of donor organ transplantation, this is the international academic community and ethical support, but there is a premise, is used for therapeutic cloning embryos beyond the bounds pregnancy 14 days. For reproductive cloning, which usually said of the clone, because it is in the general principles of ethics against life, so that the mainstream of scientists is firmly opposed. UNESCO, the world health organization and the international human genome ethics committees and governments are also very clear that oppose reproductive cloning of sex
Born in the world of the brition caused a sensation, the main reason is 2: it is a symbol of new progress in research cloning and breakthrough, and the results show: "animal execute special function, with particular form of so-called highly differentiated cells and has developed into a complete fertilized individual potential. I.e., animal cells and plant cells, also has the versatility." Two is it can be to mankind, also may become human inauspicious, i.e., it can be either for mankind, also can cause harm to human beings.
Modern science and technology, especially the modern life science and technology, will not respect the ethical principle, will not listen to ethical voice? Experts in the United States for some scientific maniac of secret that human cloning - against human life ethics.
Chinese media has a foreign media reports of an astonishing news: a cult manipulation of scientific jangkie, currently in the United States, Nevada desert with a deep secret of human cloning experiments. They created the world's first according to British scientists brition "duoli" as principle, from a dying in February 10 months upon the American baby clone cells extracted. Allegedly, "if all goes well, the world's first cloning will be born in next year."
Information disclosure, cloning and ethical problem once again become the focus among the people. If true, this news, how should think how to correctly evaluate and thinking about the question
Since 1997, British roslin institute successfully cloned dolly the sheep, after ", "continued the fame and fortune in abroad, puts forward and driven to clone research in. Although governments are banned, but with the clone in reports of disease-related once more in the past two years. However, the speed so fast, and associated with evil cults, was very shocked.
The girl lost parents hope that through cloning technology, the mood that daughter resurrection is understandable. But if scientists to experiment on human cloning is worth discussing. Don't talk, even from this cult practices is not advisable. "Clone" the individual character, he will live in the "I am a replica of a dead person," such a shadow of his psychology, this kind of influence will produce?
According to the view of bioethics, science and technology from the long-term interests and benefit the whole mankind. It must follow the "good, don't hurt, independent and impartial" the four international recognized ethical principles. "The cloned dolly the sheep" through 200 many failures occurred, the deformity or die. But cloning is more complex, will undoubtedly encounter more failure, if produce not healthy, deformity or short-lived, is a violation of human rights.
The diversity of human genes is human evolution of biology, and the scientific basis of so-called "bedlamite make immortal life", it is actually the same gene clone, this may reduce the genetic diversity, the evolution of human itself against. So, no matter from the individual, overall, or from the social evolution and ethical perspective, the life should be firmly oppose cloning of human behavior.
Now the cloned into scientific therapeutic cloning and reproductive cloning of two. The former is the use of embryonic stem cells cloned organs for medical research, to solve the shortage of donor organ transplantation, this is the international academic community and ethical support, but there is a premise, is used for therapeutic cloning embryos beyond the bounds pregnancy 14 days. For reproductive cloning, which usually said of the clone, because it is in the general principles of ethics against life, so that the mainstream of scientists is firmly opposed. UNESCO, the world health organization and the international human genome ethics committees and governments are also very clear that oppose reproductive cloning of sex. If cloning really was born, we will keep on the basic position.
Modern science and technology is a double-edged sword, the benefit of the human will also bring some negative effect. This is a question to our modern science and technology, especially the modern, life science and technology, want to respect the ethical principle, will not listen to ethical voice? Professor shen pointed out: now some scientists have proposed that science, it should be possible to do so. In fact, this is the wrong idea. If the technology we can make a serious harm human life, super can also manufacture? Some scientific dingyi science is under the banner of "free" to do some harm to humans. Therefore, we should guard modern science and technology are some ax-grinders use. In addition, also can't take scientific freedom and ethical conflict. The modern life science development, the fact that the ethical standard and guide, and not bound to the development of science, the voice of ethics and conducive to scientific development, and more healthy smoothly.

反对克隆英文观点