Is Human Cloning Another Frankenstein?

Human cloning is another Frankenstein. Creating life in an unnatural way is a matter raised by Mary Shelley's Frankenstein. Shelley concluded that it is inappropriate for humans to play God through Victor's attempt to give life to inanimate events. With the advent of creative science and the science of cloning, scientists face the same problem that Shelley proposed many years ago. This type of research has many applications and severity varies. The way users develop and execute clones is quite controversial.

Looking at Mary Sherry's Frankenstein, cloning and the ethical issues surrounding it are common. A living being in a novel is essentially defined as a human clone. But the real monster of the story is Dr. Frankenstein himself. He deceived death and tried to serve humanity looking for ways to keep life. By doing so, the doctor created a sarcastic life. Mr. Shelley's position on the clone is in fact not enough to overcome the shortcomings, so cloning is actually negative. Her point of view is just one of many perspectives. There are also many positive factors in the coldness of cloning.

Today's cloning process causes moral and ethical controversy from a religious point of view, like the way of creating life used by Dr. Frankenstein. Cloning has to do with human desires. Frankenstein is eager to create a life. The desire called temptation in this situation brought us a big mistake. By replacing the position of God and formulating the unique definition of "human", the creators of Frankenstein and the clones rebelled against God and violate the moral standard of the Bible. I understand deeply the comparison between Frankenstein and clones when defining life. They are very similar in many ways. These things tell us that life and the universe are unknown and are not fully known. We will never be infinite creators. Instead, we were created by God.