Critical Annotated Webliography - Q.3

1. In this article, Recent Human Cloning[1] written by Dr. Patrick Dixon discuss the biological reason to against the human cloning. He gave three main arguments to support his point of view. Firstly is a health risks from mutation of genes. He point out the risk of the cloning technology is extremely high right now. Because “genetic material used from the adult will continue to age so that the genes in a newborn baby clone could be - say - 30 years old or more on the day of birth.”
Secondly is emotional risks, because “Unbearable emotional pressures on a teenager trying to establish his or her identity”. For example Every time her mother looks at her she is seeing herself growing up. Unbearable emotional pressures on a teenager trying to establish his or her identity.
Lastly is the risk of abuse of the technology. Dr. Patrick Dixon suggests that There are powerful leaders in every generation who will seek to abuse this technology for their own purposes. Going ahead with cloning technology makes this far more likely.
Since Dr. Patrick Dixon provides three strong biological arguments with examples to against cloning technology. Therefore, I think it is a good article to support the risks of cloning technology.

2. There is an article, Cloning Yes or No?[2], gives a briefly background information about what is cloning, which helps the readers to know more about the concept of it. Then it raises the most famous cloning case- Dolly, to be an example to explain the steps of clone a sheep. After that, the article provides the pros, cons and dilemma arguments and let the reader examine themselves. The PROSScientists think that cloning may be a way to increase the populations of endangered species. Moreover, it could be used for medical research and the study of genetic diseases. Cloning could also be used therapeutically, cloning only a few cells to replace the cells in a sick person.The CONSThere are many reasons why people believe cloning is undesirable, mainly due to ethical reasons. And some people also believe that cloning would result in children who do not having an "open future," because their genes will cause them to become like the person they are a clone of. In addition, Religious organizations feel that cloning puts too much power in the hands of humans and that cloning ignores the fact that each human has a unique soul. Religious leaders believe that we need to draw the line between right and wrong more clearly in cloning.The DILEMMA Provide an open ended of the article, it let the readers know that there are benefits, there are also risks of cloning, so the reader can decide for yourself whether it is good or bad.

3. Now's Not A Good Time; Can We Talk Later?[3] is a short article talking about the potential problem of human cloning. Although the article is short, it discuss the reason why people want to give birth of a cloning baby. “Many individuals have been perceived as wanting a clone to live the life that they didn’t have , bringing back lost memories of relatives, and being responsible for designer children. Cloning is no more than a possibility for people to explore themselves. They try to compensate for lost time through their future clones, a condition that people may have seen in parents that force their children to live the dreams that they were unable to live.”Moreover, the article raise a question “Being born a clone is one thing, but living as a clone is an idea that has not been clearly thought through” This is a open question, but can give a chance for people to think about more of the result of cloning.This article not only states the potential problem of cloning, and also provides some question to let people knows that how to clone is a new technology which scientist want to develop. However, the result of after cloning a child will bring what kind of problem. This kind of refection is not always in the similar article which talk about cloning.

4. Cloning: As Quintessential Human Act[4] by Philip Hefner gives us a clear concept of how Christian comment cloning. From the article, Philip think that cloning is an unnatural issue. It collapse the nature, morality and the religion. “My Christian tradition offers some very general, but yet pertinent, guidelines for this discussion: (1) all life is a gift of God, including the life that is able to discover how to clone; (2) we are expected to be good stewards of God's gifts, which mean (3) that we are both free and accountable to God and our fellow humans for what we do; we have a vocation from God to be free and accountable; (4) all of this takes place under the conditions of sin--we are finite, fallible, motivated by self-interest that can include greed and desire for power; sin is not an excuse for withdrawing from life, but rather a reminder of what sort of realistic vigilance must accompany our decisions of how to live. My Lutheran tradition asserts that we are saints and sinners at the same time. This describes precisely the condition of humans as clones of other animals and of themselves.”From his point of view, we can see that the dissenter provide the points to against the cloning. Moreover, cloning is usually described as the collapse of Genesis. Therefore it is a good example to use in the article to show the arguments of different side.

5. In this article Modern Technology: A Threat to Jewish Sanctity[5] by Rabbi Eli Teitelbaum talks about the technology makes the human life not purity anymore. “While modern inventions have made life easier and more enjoyable, they have brought in their wake a very great threat to our holiness. In times of old, one could easily barricade himself within the sanctity of his own home in order to avoid the many temptations and pitfalls of the perverted world. Modern times are making this more and more difficult. We are no longer safe even in our own homes, as the worst of Mitzrayim's abominations threatens to invade our privacy and sanctity.”The author suggests that people are difficult to isolate themselves nowadays. Because of the technology waves, people are easily linked together. If someone hides himself in his home just the telephone and computer lines also can link him to the outside. Compare to the time of old, human are not easily to barricade himself within the sanctity of his own home in order to avoid the many temptations and pitfalls of the perverted world.Therefore, this article can totally show that how technology change human life and the technology are not easily to prevent no matter the people isolate himself in his own home.

6. Rich Heltzel writes an essay Modern Science: Technology and the World[6] to discuss the technology only contribute to some high income group and “superior race” in the world. “Low income countries are plagued with hunger, while we have an excess. We are not wrong for our excess food supply, but only wrong if we do not help others obtain this abundance with modern technology.”Moreover, the technology causes the problem of pollution to result different kinds of disease nowadays. The article supported by some evidence and data which provide by some international organization. This can make the article more convincing.

Bliography
[1] Dixon, Patrick, ‘Recent Human Cloning’ on Globalchange.com
http://www.globalchange.com/noclones.htm (accessed 29 March 2008)
[2] ‘Cloning Ethics’ http://library.thinkquest.org/TQ0312650/cloning.htm (accessed 29 March 2008)
[3] ‘Now's Not A Good Time; Can We Talk Later’ http://www.u.arizona.edu/~tuanv/CEthics.html (accessed 29 March 2008)

[4] Hefner, Philip , ‘Cloning: As Quintessential Human Act’ in Chicago center for religion and science http://www.usao.edu/~facshaferi/HEFNER2.HTML (accessed 29 March 2008)

[5] Teitelbaum, Rabbi, ‘Modern Technology: A Threat to Jewish Sanctity’ http://www.campsci.com/articles/modern_technology.htm (accessed 29 March 2008)

[6] Heltzel, Rich, ‘Modern Science: Technology and the World’, The People’s Media Company. http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/220747/modern_science_technology_and_the_world.html?page=3 (accessed 29 March 2008)