That human cloning should always be opposed on moral grounds.

AveThanks NoCoolNameNate. First of all, my arguments will not be so good because I am playing devil's advocate, and that I never did this topic before. But not caring about that, let's start the debate. I will be making my arguments and my framework in this round, and I won't make my rebuttals even though my opponent already made his arguments.==Observations==O1: My first observation will be on the burdens. The burden of proof is shared, as the resolution is normative. Pro has to show that human cloning should always be opposed, when Con says that it should not always be opposed. So, onto my burden, there are two ways to show my burden.1) Human cloning should always be allowed on moral grounds2) Human cloning should always, but should not always be opposed on moral groundsEven though I choose one of these, I fill my burden.==Framework==My framework will be about utilitarianism. This is showing society, and seeing what causes more pleasure, or more harms. For example, if we having cloning has more pleasure than harms, and no pleasure, then we have human cloning, if we follow utilitarianism. The definition from Merriam-Webster is: the belief that a morally good action is one that helps the greatest number of people [4]. Now, because I have explained my framework, I will now go onto my arguments of the debate.==Argument 1: Infertiles==Okay, my first argument will be about infertile and suicides. First of all, we need to know what is infertile before we start our argument.Infertile: not able to reproduce : not able to produce children, young animals, etc. [1]Around 1/8 couples in the US cannot produce children, or to say, infertile [2]. That is a lot of people. And more shockingly then this, around 95% of the infertiles suffer depression [3], and that can lead to suicide, and many other key effects that may harm someone's life. So basically the infertiles are suffering and having depression because they have no children. There are few ways to help these infertiles.The reason here is basically; human cloning. Human cloning makes a human, a children for the infertiles. Then the infertiles don't have depression, as they will then have children. If they have children, they won't have depression, and won't suicide, and some key effects that I said above. This will be a yes cloning utilitarianism, from my framework as I said. The survivial of children is less than 10% if no cloning for infertiles [5]. However with cloning, you get a perfectly healthy child, so from Utilitarianism, it shows that from a net benefit, we should allow cloning. This can also help future homesexuals and infertiles get more children. ==Argument 2: Diseases==My second argument will be about diseasesThese days in the world there are lots of cancers. Literally one of the four deaths in the United States are from cancer [6]. Since 1990, there had been approximately 5 million cancer related deaths [6]. That is a huge number of deaths. Tons of new-born babies get cancers, and die right away because they are not strong enough. People are begging an answer to stop all of this cancer, and their babies dying like this. The answer is cloning. With cloning, they clone to make healthy human beings, and then these babies wil be born with no cancer and those things in their lives, which would normally they might be killed because of cancer. This makes less dying babies, and a family can live happily with no mind and anything about cancer, etc. This will make families happy, and from the Utilitarianism framework, with more people happy, this shows that cloning should be allowed. ==Argument 3: Medical Reasons==This is my last argument, and it will be about medical reasons. Human cloning can also give good things for your health. For example, let's say that your kidney is very bad. Then you can take your clones kidney, and replace it from your kidney. This will give happiness to the ones who are hurt, because they will no longer be hurt, because they can take some parts from the healthy clones body. This also is shown from the Utiliarianism framework, so we should allow human cloning, from this reason above also.==Conclusion==So from the resolution, human cloning is moral, as I showed the reasons above, that it helps people from suicides, makes people have happy lives, and human cloning should definetly be allowed on the Utiliarianism framework, and the framework itself is showing if it is moral or immoral. And from my arguments, human cloning is moral, and it has lots of benefits, therefore I show my side clearly that human cloning should be allowed, as there are way more benefits then harms from human cloningAnd for the burden, I have shown that cloning is good for lots of reasons, and that literally shows that it shouldn't always be opposed. My burden is full in the debate, and I will rebut my opponent's arguments in the next round. Back to Pro for the debate. Peace and Love <3. (from Hayd)==Sources==[1] (http://www.merriam-webster.com...)[2] (http://goo.gl...)[3] (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...)[4] (http://www.merriam-webster.com...)[5] (http://www.as.wvu.edu...)[6] (http://www.thomlatimercares.org...)Now let's get started with the actual "debate" with rebuttals, and let Pro begin!!!Vale