The film, The Island, deals with a fictional ethical issue that is quickly becoming a reality. Should cloning humans for organs be allowed? In The Island, clones are being made in order to provide their counterparts with organs, body parts, or anything else harvestable. This “luxury” is extremely expensive, so all of the clones are of rich and famous people. The clones were kept in an asylum where they were monitored all day. To avoid rebellion, the clones were tricked into believing that they were survivors of an apocalyptic contamination of the earth. They were told that there was only one safe haven left on earth, an island and the only way to go to the island was to “win” a lottery, which was thought to be a random selection. Actually, when they did “win” the lottery, it meant that their counterparts were ready for a part. During the movie, two of the clones escape and expose the inhumanity of the situation.
With animal and plant cloning currently being experimented and perfected, human cloning is becoming an increasing possibility. This movie didn’t go into detail about the side effects of human cloning, such as deformities or deaths. It dealt more with how clones would be raised / kept. Clones are genetic copies of the individual from which they were derived so they would be capable of rational thought. If the clones were aware that they were created to be harvested for their parts, there would have been an uprising. This is why they were told the lie about the island. This raises questions about the morality of harvesting clones for organs. “Should one living being be killed to save another’s life?” and furthermore, “Should one living being be killed to donate parts?” I use the term “donate” lightly when speaking about clones because donate implies that there’s free will.
Another issue The Island raises is whether or not clones have the right of free will, or if they have any rights at all. The main character, Lincoln Six Echo, starts to doubt that there is even an island at all. He becomes angered at how closely they are monitored and wonders why. In order for clones to have rights, they would have to be humans. Again this is yet another controversial topic that seems to appear in the film. To prevent the clones from reproducing with one another the overseers implement a proximity rule that keeps men and women separate. Regardless of the rules, Lincoln still makes a friend with a clone woman named Jordan Two Delta. This incident shows that clones may have the capacity to love and the urge to mingle with the opposite sex. It is apparent that the most complicated problem that rises when pondering the ethics of cloning is the question of their rights.
Some of the female clones were created to give birth to children for regular people. The movie didn’t elaborate as to whether these birthing clones were of a woman who could not give birth or someone who was a good candidate for birth. The woman in the movie that birthed the baby was, of course, elated to have given birth and wanted to see her baby after it was born but the doctors quickly took the infant away to give to the non-cloned mother. The clone that had given birth was then killed since she had done her job. This raises a whole new issue of the ethicality of using clones as living vessels for child birth. Should a life be taken in order to give a life?
The film takes a dramatic plot twist after Lincoln and Jordan escape from the cloning asylum. The issue of cloning is not addressed much anymore until Lincoln meets his counterpart. One can imagine the eeriness of standing face to face with “themselves”. The problem with clones living among their counterparts is that there would be an identity conflict. People could commit crimes and blame it on their clones or vice versa. When a clone is made they are meant to be exact replicas, so they would also have the same fingerprints as their original copies.
As for me, I am against human cloning altogether, but if they are created, I believe that they should be given the same rights as ordinary humans. Rights are something that everyone is entitled to; animals even have rights, so there is no reason why clone should be without them. Some say that clones are not humans but I beg to differ. If you look at the genetic make-up of a clone and an ordinary human, you would not be able to tell which one is a clone.
As I stated before, clones have brains and are capable of thought and hence free will. Now those who are for cloning humans for organs try to argue that we could “make the clones dumb” to stop them from feeling or thinking. Is this not the same logic that slave owners used to keep their slaves suppressed? The clones in The Island were ignorant as to what they were but did that make it right? Just because someone is dumb doesn’t make them less than human or give one the right to kill them.
When faced with the earlier issue about the clone mother, one must wonder what kind of complications there are for clones to have children. Surely there is bound to be some sort of problem with clones reproducing either with each other or an ordinary human. Also, using someone as a means to an end is, especially involuntarily, is wrong. I’m pretty sure the clone mother, if given the chance, would have kept her baby and would have wanted to live.
With advances in technology, more and more things are becoming possible. As a result, more ethical questions must be answered. The Island brilliantly depicts the situations we may have to face in the future. The conclusion that is inferred in the movie is that cloning is immoral. It’s wrong to kill an innocent person for the benefit of another.
