Manuscript 2

Name: Bryn

Adams______________________
ELang 410R, Fall 2014, Thorne
Use the Comments function to diagnose problems with the use of claims, assumptions, and evidence;
with logical fallacies; and with effective introductions and conclusions.

My purpose in writing this essay is to help you see that cloning is nothing to worry about.
Cloning is an important topic. There is no reason to worry about cloning. Banning the cloning of humans
will do nothing except make people feel a little bit safer from the perceived misuse of cloning. Just as
professor of bioethics Ruth Macklin stated, While human cloning might not offer great benefits to
humanity, no one has yet made a persuasive case that it would do any real harm, either. Many people are
in such a tumult over the fact that an animal was cloned that they lose sight of why this research is taking
place. The process is a quicker way to turn genetically altered cells into animals that could make diseasefighting drugs or donor organs for humans, says Alan Colman of PPL Therapeutics, which funded the

Bryn Adams 3/17/15 3:31 PM

Comment [1]: You say this is the purpose
of the essay, but there seems to be more than
one purpose. The introduction should state
your purpose clearly.
Bryn Adams 3/17/15 10:43 PM
Comment [2]: Sweeping generalization.
There most likely are reasons to worry about
cloning but that isnt your argument. Your
argument is that cloning should be regulated
and controlled.

Bryn Adams 3/17/15 3:31 PM

Comment [3]: The banning and legalizing
of cloning would be an interesting topic to
argue. You mention legalizing it in your
conclusion, but if you want that to be your
argument you need to change the purpose of
your essay to arguing for legalizing cloning
... [1]
Bryn Adams 3/17/15 3:41 PM
Comment [4]: The previous sentences
sound like a tentative thesis. Creating a more
... [2]
Bryn Adams 3/17/15 3:04 PM
Comment [5]: This is a great quote, but
should have an in-text citation to back it up.
Bryn Adams 3/17/15 9:42 PM
Comment [6]: Is he an authority that would
know about this subject? Or did he simply
... help
[3]
Bryn Adams 3/17/15 3:05 PM

program in which Dolly was created. In fact, the companys main mission is not cloning at all; it is

Comment [7]: Once again a great quote, but

needs an in-text citation.

genetically altering sheep so that human drugs are produced in their milk.

Bryn Adams 3/17/15 3:06 PM

Comment [8]: This is an assumption that
some people may not agree with. It would
... be
[4]

Many theologians argue that clones would violate human dignity. But most prominent among
these critics are members of the Universal Life Theological Union, which is supported by reactionary
business organizations that have a vested interest in opposing cloning for economic reasons. As Ruth
Macklin points out, cloning would violate human dignity only if society treated clones as lesser beings,

Bryn Adams 3/17/15 3:07 PM

Comment [9]: This is an ad hominem
... [5]of
fallacy. This comment is attacking members
Bryn Adams 3/17/15 3:09 PM
Comment [10]: Is there truly only one way
in which cloning could violate human dignity?
... [6]
Bryn Adams 3/17/15 3:22 PM

with fewer rights and lower status. Since clones would have their own souls, it would be unlikely that

Comment [11]: This is a post hoc fallacy.

There is no connection between people having
... [7]

society would treat them as lesser beings. Twins are, in fact, natures clones. They have the exact same

Bryn Adams 3/17/15 9:19 PM

Comment [12]: While this professor Turner
might be trustworthy, he is a psychologist.
... [8]

genetic makeup, yet they do not lose dignity due to their repetitiveness, says Craig Turner, a professor of
psychology from Yale. Clones would be quite different from their originals, since twins grow up quite
different from each other. In fact, the clone will no doubt be quite different from the original, since the
clone will not share the womb as twins do and will live sometime after the donor. To put it simply: as

Bryn Adams 3/17/15 3:11 PM

Comment [13]: Needs citation
Bryn Adams 3/17/15 9:24 PM
Comment [14]: Prove that twins grow up
different from each other.
Bryn Adams 3/17/15 9:24 PM
Comment [15]: If there is no doubt that
they will be different prove it. Simply by... [9]

Robert McFinn, a cellular biologist, stated, Identical genes do not provide for identical individuals.
Most theologians and scientists agree that the clone and the donor would be totally different and distinct
persons.
Many people fear the fact that people will make clones in order to take the organs they need from
them to survive their own life-threatening diseases. It is a well-known fact, though, that many parents
have another child to save one of their children suffering from a disease in which an organ or bone

Bryn Adams 3/17/15 9:27 PM

Comment [16]: Give an in-text citation
Bryn Adams 3/17/15 9:22 PM
Comment [17]: There might be people that
disagree with this statement that most people
agree on this issue. This needs to be backed up
by concrete evidence.

Bryn Adams 3/17/15 3:14 PM

Comment [18]: This is a sweeping
generalization with no evidence to back it up.
The sample size of many is too large and
broad.
Bryn Adams 3/17/15 3:59 PM

marrow must be matched. This is not often frowned upon because the child is cared for and loved just as

Comment [19]: Well-known by who?

There is no evidence to back this up.

the preceding sibling. The question that needs to be considered is how this would be different from a

Bryn Adams 3/17/15 4:01 PM

Comment [20]:

cloned child.

Bryn Adams 3/17/15 4:01 PM

Comment [21R20]: There is no causal link
between parents having another child in order
to save one that is suffering from an organ
disease. Post hoc fallacy that would need
evidence to back it up if it were true.

Many mysteries abound in this world undiscovered. By banning cloning before even researching
the potential contributions of this process, we may be limiting ourselveskeeping ourselves from
discovering something important. Making cloning illegal does not guarantee that all researchers will
comply with the ban. Additionally it could increase the potential for misuse. We will have no control over
the process and will gain no information about potential benefits. At least if it is legal, it can be regulated
and watched. The question of whether cloning should be banned should be changed to the question of
how we should regulate and control cloning. That would be more realistic.

Bryn Adams 3/17/15 4:03 PM

Comment [22]: Back this claim up with
evidence. Your audience may not trust this
claim without evidence. With evidence, you
can more safely make the assumption that this
would be no different than a cloned child.

Bryn Adams 3/17/15 3:27 PM

Comment [23]: This is a very good
conclusion for a paper, but what you are
arguing needs to be stated more clearly before
this point. Throughout the essay it does not
seem that you are arguing for legalizing
cloning. In fact, there is no mention of
legalizing it until this part. Make a decision on
if you are arguing that cloning isnt bad or that
it should be legalized.
Bryn Adams 3/17/15 9:28 PM
Comment [24]: Starting out with a broad
and sweeping statement isnt the best way to
begin your conclusion. This statement does not
really add anything to the conclusion.
Bryn Adams 3/17/15 10:41 PM
Comment [25]: This is a non-sequitar
fallacy. The fact that some researchers might
not abide by the ban does not mean that the
ban is morally wrong.

Bryn Adams 3/17/15 10:42 PM

Comment [26]: Needs more evidence to
back up this claim.
Bryn Adams 3/17/15 3:34 PM
Comment [27]: If your argument is that
legalizing cloning would be better than
banning it, your claims and assumptions...would
[10]