Clone: Is cloning fair to cloned humans?
Yes
Human cloning violates the rights of
the child to parents Statement of the
Catholic Leadership Conference on Human
Cloning. The Catholic Leadership
Conference. November 1, 2001 - "In the
case of reproductive cloning the
engendered child would be brought to term
and delivered without the benefit of parents
since it would carry the genetic code only of
the one who had supplied the DNA from his
or her somatic cell. This would also
constitute a violation of the rights of the
child in many ways. Since there is currently
no basis in common or statutory law to
determine who would have responsibility
for the care of the child, it would be left in
a precarious position."
While illegal clones should have rights,
a ban is still justified John F. Kilner and
Robert P. George. "Human Cloning: What’s
at Stake". The Center for Bioethics and
Dignity. 2004 - "All human cloning—all
creation of new human beings by asexual
processes—should be legally prohibited. Yet
even with proper laws in place, it is likely
that someday someone would break the
laws, creating and bringing to term a
cloned human, or perhaps several such
persons. It is important that we
acknowledge in advance their human
dignity and fundamental rights.
But the likelihood of such a birth by
no means suggests that this
demeaning practice should remain
legal. Why not?
At the deepest level, cloning should
be prohibited because it turns
procreation into a species of
manufacture. It treats a child-to-be
as an object of production."
 Human cloning produces sub-
humans without ordinary
souls. Human cloning produces
individuals artificially. As such, these
individuals cannot have ordinary, God-
given souls. Sadly, therefore, clones are
sub-humans.
 Scientists want to create a race of
clones to experiment on Wayne
Jackson. "The Ethics of Human Cloning".
The Christian Courier. April 30, 2001 -
"One must first raise this question? Why
No
Deformed clones would still be happy to be
alive Nick Bostrom, Faculty of Philosophy at
Oxford University. "Human Reproductive Cloning
from the Perspective of the Future". December
27th, 2002 - "Such an imaginary point-of-view can
help us put things in perspective. There is one
argument that, as a future clone, you might
understand and agree with: concerns about the
safety of the procedure. The argument that we
ought to postpone human cloning until we have
perfected the method in animals makes some
degree of sense. (Even so, suppose you were a
slightly deformed human clone - would you agree
that it was a terrible moral offense to have caused
you to come into existence?)"
 Cloned humans have a soul and are ordinary
humans in every way "The case for cloning
humans". The Age. January 1, 2003 - "But what
of the souls? Can two people share the one soul?
Is it not wrong to force two personalities on to
one piece of divine substance? Again, the fact
that there are identical twins counts against there
being a problem. Twins seem to manage, and that
seems to suggest that each person is able to be
ensouled regardless of their genetic make-up.
That is, assuming souls exist at all. These days
theologians don't make a big thing of the soul.
But even if there are souls, it seems unlikely to
count against cloning. It's hard to imagine that
God would have any difficulty telling the
difference between one clone and another, or in
ensuring that each person has a distinct soul - if
that is how it works."
 Cloned humans should have equal
rights Brendan Tobin of the Irish Center for
Human Rights, an author a UN report on
cloning: "Failure to outlaw reproductive cloning
means it is just a matter of time until cloned
individuals share the planet. If failure to
compromise continues, the world community
must accept responsibility and ensure that any
cloned individual receives full human rights
protection. It will also need to embark on an
extensive awareness building and sensitivity
program to ensure that the wider society treats
clones with respect and ensure they are
protected against prejudice, abuse or
discrimination."[1]
 do scientists want to clone human
beings? It certainly is not because they
are anxious to generate a larger
population for our planet. They
continually protest that the earth is over-
crowded already. Rather, they are
anxious to create a brand of humans
with whom they can experiment."
 People want to clone humans for
their organs. Rabbi Shraga Simmons.
"Cloning". June 3rd, 2008. Aisha.com -
"the potential for abuse is enormous. The
most frightening idea is "growing"
humans in cages, in order to "harvest"
their bodies for spare parts. It is not far-
fetched to imagine an unscrupulous
multi-millionaire cloning himself in this
manner -- in case he should ever need a
kidney, heart, eye, bone marrow, etc."
Clone safety: Does human cloning encounter safety problems?
Yes
Cloning technology is unsafe for the
resulting life. The nuclear transfer
technique that produced Dolly required 277
embryos, from which only one healthy and
viable sheep was produced. The other
foetuses were hideously deformed and
either died or were aborted. Moreover, Ian
Wilmut and other commentators have
noted that we cannot know whether clones
will suffer from premature ageing as a
result of their elderly genes. There are also
fears that the reprogramming of the
nucleus of a somatic cell in order to trigger
the cell division that leads to the cloning of
an individual may result in a significantly
increased risk of cancer.
Human cloning results in the death of
many cloned babies John Kilner,
president of the Centre for Bioethics and
Human Dignity in the United States - "The
majority of published research shows that
death or mutilation of the clone are the
most likely outcomes of mammalian
cloning"[2]
Pushing forward with human cloning
violates the precautionary
principle"Why Environmentalists Oppose
Human Cloning And Inheritable Genetic
 Clones are not good or bad; they have the
potential to be either Rabbi Shraga Simmons.
"Cloning". June 3rd, 2008. Aisha.com - "So... is
cloning good or bad? Judaism says there is
nothing in the world that is inherently good or
evil; there is only the potential for good and evil.
Even something we typically associate as "bad" -
for example, outrage - can be used for good -
outrage against injustice. Similarly, even
something we typically associate as "good" - for
example, giving - can be used for bad - over-
giving, or smothering. Talent, education and
wisdom only have potential."
 Clones' quality-of-life depends on how they
are received/treated If clones are treated
poorly by society, they will lead less happy lives
as others. If they are treated well, they will likely
lead equally happy lives as normal people.
Because their happiness will depend largely on
how we receive them, we need only adjust our
attitude to be more receptive. Banning cloning
because we will mistreat them is not fair; it
punishes clones for our failures
No
Cloning is safe enough to perform on
humans Pamela Schaeffer. "Special Section:
Human Destiny. Many oppose human cloning".
National Catholic Reporter - "Many non-scientists
assume that cloning humans will be too difficult
and risky a process to attempt on humans. But
Silver challenges the “muddled thinking” behind
such arguments. Despite early hurdles,
experimentation with cloning is moving ahead.
In early October, for instance, a dozen cloned
Holsteins were introduced at the World Dairy Expo
in Madison, Wis. The reaction was curiosity more
than shock. “We just wanted people to realize that
[cloning] was moving very rapidly from science to
a commercial technology,” Michael Bishop, vice
president of research for De Forest biotechnology
company, told a reporter for the Milwaukee Journal
Sentinel. “We want to show that [the calves] are
normal, healthy and growing, and there’s nothing
to be afraid of.”"
Medical advancements once feared are now
accepted; cloning is the same. "The case for
cloning humans". The Age. January 1, 2003 -
"Whenever a new possibility comes along we tend
to oppose it. IVF was opposed; surrogacy even
Modification". Friends of the Earth.
Retrieved June 3rd, 2008 - "Why
Environmental Groups Oppose Human
Cloning. While all of us seek to improve the
quality of human life, certain activities in
the area of genetics and cloning should be
prohibited because they violate basic
environmental and ethical principles -
principles that form the core values for
which the environmental movement stands.
Precautionary Principle - The precautionary
principle is a cornerstone of
environmentalism. It requires that we have
some regard for the consequences of our
actions before we carry them out. In this
century alone, the list of unforeseen and
unintended consequences of modern
industrial civilization is enormous; so is the
attendant economic and environmental
damage. The unforeseen and devastating
consequences of the use of CFCs, DDT, and
PCBs illustrate the need for this underlying
principle."
Individualism: Will individualism be undermined by cloning?
Yes
A cloned human would have a
diminished sense of
identity/individualityInstead of being
considered as a unique individual, the child
will be a copy of his parent, and be
expected to share the same traits and
interests, such that his life will no longer be
his own. This is an unacceptable
infringement of the liberty and autonomy
that we grant to every human person. The
confusion of the offspring is likely to be
compounded by the fact that his ‘parent’,
from whom he is cloned, will be genetically
his twin brother or sister. There is no way
of knowing how children will react to having
such a confused genetic heritage.
Reproductive cloning generally
diminishes human individualism "Why
Environmentalists Oppose Human Cloning
And Inheritable Genetic Modification".
Friends of the Earth. Retrieved June 3rd,
2008 - "Today, we face another change --
the radical reorganization of life at the
genetic level. This could propel us into a
“brave new world,” devaluing each
individual and completing the divorce from
nature that began a long time ago."
more so. But we have come to accept both. In the
case of IVF, there were similar fears about the risk
of harm to the child - and we have come to live
with the actual results. So it might be with cloning.
What at first seems unthinkable might turn out to
be a blessing for some or a possibility for many."
Opponents exaggerate the impact that
cloning will have on the world Nick Bostrom,
Faculty of Philosophy at Oxford University. "Human
Reproductive Cloning from the Perspective of the
Future". December 27th, 2002 - "In the big
scheme of things, cloning will not significantly
change the world. Some people will owe their lives
to this technology, and some infertile couples will
be grateful for having had the chance to raise a
child of their own. Some people may misguidedly
use cloning to try to bring back a lost child or a
loved one, not realizing that personal identity is not
reducible to genetic identity. Some people may
choose to have a child that is a clone of a stranger
they admire, perhaps a great scientist, athlete or
religious leader; yet if the current level of demand
for elite sperm or elite eggs is any guide, the
people who choose this option will be in a tiny
minority."
No
Cloning does not xerox an individual; all
individuals become unique Pamela Schaeffer.
"Special Section: Human Destiny. Many oppose
human cloning". National Catholic Reporter - "Many
scientists and ethicists caution, too, against
“genetic determinism,” pointing out that
environmental factors play a critical role in shaping
human development. Michael Jordan’s clone,
lacking the same drive and training, might not be a
basketball star."
It is a false requirement that clones possess
individuality Why should it matter that clones
posses individuality? Do other humans have full
individuality? Yes and no. Similar to clones
possessing the genetic code of their parent, so too
do normal ordinary children. And, in the same way
that an individual is influenced and shaped by their
parents, so too are clones. That clones have a fully
individual identity is, therefore, a false
requirement.
Individualism will be maintained despite
cloning, as "clones" will develop their own
unique identities: Children produced by
reproductive cloning will be ‘clones’ but not ‘copies’
of their parents: Different environmental factors,
nurture, and the process of gestation mean that
children will not be emotionally or mentally
Human cloning makes individuals
replaceable "Is Human Reproductive
Cloning Inevitable: Future Options for UN
Governance". United Nations University.
September 2007 - "Amongst the arguments
raised against cloning has been concern
that reproductive cloning would lessen the
respect for individuals because of the
feeling that they could easily be
replaced.23 Every form of reproductive
technology raises some question of human
values, dignity, worth and juridical rights,
some linked to the notion that the person
should not be used as a mere mechanical
instrument, and that every human
individual is a non-repeatable being."
Playing God/nature? Is human cloning playing God and/or nature?
Yes
Cloning plays against God's intentions
for reproduction and family. It is not
merely intervention in the body’s natural
processes, but the creation of a new and
wholly unnatural process of asexual
reproduction. Clerics within the Catholic,
Moslem and Jewish faiths have all
expressed their opposition to human
cloning.However, this objection to cloning is
not specifically theological. David Hume,
the eighteenth-century Scottish moral
philosopher, warned us to heed our feelings
as much as our logical reasoning. Leon R.
Kass of the University of Chicago has stated
in relation to human cloning, that mere
failure to produce scientific reasons against
the technology, does not mean we should
deny our strong and instinctive reactions to
it. As he states, there is a "wisdom in
repugnance".
Cloning undermines the natural
relationship between procreation and
familyPamela Schaeffer. "Special Section:
Human Destiny. Many oppose human
cloning". National Catholic Reporter - "The
Vatican opposes cloning humans, in part,
because it is a means of reproduction that,
like in vitro fertilization, does not derive
directly from sexual intercourse between a
married man and woman. In fact, more
than any other reproductive technology,
cloning threatens to sever the link between
sex, marriage and reproduction, and to
render the male role in reproduction
obsolete."
Asexual reproduction is sub-optimal
for the human species Dr. George
identical to the people from whom they are cloned.
Furthermore, this objection would apply to all
identical twins. A small proportion of identical twins
do indeed suffer from psychological problems
related to feelings of a lack of individuality.
However, cloned children would in fact be in a
better position than these monozygotic twins, as
the clones will be many years younger than their
genetic twins, which are of course their parents.
They will not be daily compared to a physically
identical individual, as there will be a gap between
their ages, and hence psychological and physical
characteristics, of tens of years.
Moral arguments against cloning are unfair to
future human clones How would you feel if you
were a clone and society considered your creation
illegal and your existence deplorable? Our of
respect for human clones (human beings in every
respect), a ban on human cloning should be
opposed.
No
This argument assumes that we know God’s
intentions. Evidently, there is no biblical
statement on the ethics of human cloning. Who is
to say that it is not God’s will that we clone
ourselves ? At least one Hindu writer has indicated
that Hindu thought embraces IVF and other
assisted reproduction technology (ART). Moreover,
every time that a doctor performs life-saving
surgery or administers drugs he is changing the
destiny of the patient and could be thus seen as
usurping the role of God. Furthermore, we should
be very wary of banning something without being
able to say why it is wrong. That way lie all sorts
irrational superstition, repression, fundamentalism
and extremism.
Human cloning "plays God" less than lauded
therapeutic cloning "The case for cloning
humans". The Age. January 1, 2003 - "I mention
God, and to some people it seems that God alone
should have power over life and death. It is playing
God for us to interfere in this way with the
reproductive process. Such an objection may
actually be the most powerful for some people. The
sin of hubris - Icarus trying to be like God and
flying too high - there has always been literature
about the need to accept human limitations. The
recognition of limits and acceptance of our destiny
is an attitude we have admired and thought noble.
When it comes to playing God, stem cell research
might be more of a problem. I refer to the cloning
of embryos in order to harvest cells. God's
purposes for embryos may be presumed to include
that of procreation. Whatever else embryos are
intended for, one of their purposes is to make it
possible for babies to be born. Cloning involves the
Johnson. "Should A Clone Have Rights?".
On Science. Retrieved July 9th, 2008 -
"Asexual reproduction, in which all offspring
are genetically identical clones, is common
in nature in both plants (dandilions are a
common example) and animals (some
lizard species have only females), but
usually only in extreme or high-risk
environments, where survival is uncertain.
Nature has not favored asexual
reproduction in any mammal because the
20% of variation due to nurture is just not
enough protection against an uncertain
future if you are going to make a major
investment in each offspring. It is thus the
very nature of our species that places such
value on variation among individuals, and I
find that the deepest and most compelling
reason to carefully consider the implications
of human cloning before proceeding."
Human cloning divorces man from
nature and natural processes "Why
Environmentalists Oppose Human Cloning
And Inheritable Genetic Modification".
Friends of the Earth. Retrieved June 3rd,
2008 - "Today, we face another change --
the radical reorganization of life at the
genetic level. This could propel us into a
“brave new world,” devaluing each
individual and completing the divorce from
nature that began a long time ago."
Human dignity: Is human cloning contrary to the notion of human dignity?
Yes
Reproductive cloning undermines
human dignity: ‘Donum Vitae’, the
declaration of the Catholic church in
relation to the new reproductive
technologies, holds that procreation outside
the conjugal union is morally wrong. Many
secular organisations, such as the WHO and
UNESCO have issued statements that
similarly find cloning violates human
dignity. Assisted reproductive technologies
might all be seen as challenges to human
dignity, including IVF and sperm donation.
However, human cloning is a completely
artificial form of reproduction, which leaves
no trace of the dignity of human
procreation.
Reproductive cloning would entail
dehumanizing experimentation "Just
Say No To Human Cloning". The Center for
Public Justice. March 18, 1997 - "Let's allow
science to move forward. But let's also
recognize that science is not God and ought
to be kept within bounds. It should not be
treated as humanity's savior. Human
beings are not simply genes and molecules.
use of advanced reproductive technology precisely
for this purpose - to produce a baby. However,
therapeutic cloning (for stem cells) is a matter of
starting the reproductive process and then killing
off the embryo so that stem cells can be collected.
In which case, can we be said to be playing God?
And yet there is widespread agreement as to the
rightness of therapeutic cloning."
Humans have the right to choose to practice
cloning "Why cloning people is a good idea".
Everything 2. Retrieved June 7th, 2008 - "Cloning
is the freedom to choose. We have that right. The
only ones out there who think we don't are the
theists, whose ideological basis is that they are
slaves anyway to some invisible master. These
people believe it is wrong to "create" life. We
create life every time we plant a plant or breed
livestock. We create life every time we mate, but
that union's outcome is random. Humans aren't
special. Our planet takes up such a tiny part of the
universe and so many things could kill us off. We
need every bit of luck and innovation to survive."
No
Why is sexual procreation more "dignified"
than scientific procreation? It is difficult to
understand why the act of sexual intercourse that
leads to sexual procreation is any more ‘dignified’
or respectable than a reasoned decision by an adult
to have a child, that is assisted by modern science.
The thousands of children given life through IVF
therapy do not suffer a lack of dignity as a
consequence of their method of procreation. The
Catholic church regards every embryo from the
moment of existence as a living person. This
position is not shared by most Western
governments, and it would deny not only cloning,
but IVF and all the medical knowledge and benefits
that have accrued from embryo research.
The sanctity of human life should be
protected in law. Humans should not be
turned into an experimental playground."
Human clones will be seen and treated
by some as inferior John F. Kilner and
Robert P. George. "Human Cloning: What’s
at Stake". The Center for Bioethics and
Dignity. 2004 - "Yet it is predictable that
cloned children—as products of ethically
dubious asexual reproduction—will be
viewed by some as inferior, much the way
that many people once looked down on
children born out of wedlock."
Eugenics: Will cloning lead to an unethical eugenics movement?
Yes
Cloning will lead to eugenics, or the
artificial manipulation and control of
the characteristics of people. An
American geneticist, Dr. Dan Brock, has
already identified a trend towards ‘new and
benign eugenics’ that is perpetrated by
developments in biotechnology. When
people are able to clone themselves they
will be able to choose which type of person
shall be born. This seems uncomfortably
close to the Nazi concept of breeding a race
of Aryan superhumans, whilst eliminating
those individuals whose characteristics they
considered unhealthy. The ‘Boys from
Brazil’ scenario of clones of Hitler, the baby
farms of ‘Brave New World’, or even the
cloning or armies of identical and
disposable soldiers, might soon be a very
real prospect.
Dictators will use cloning to produce
massive armies.
Cloning evil people will not result in
evil clones "Why cloning people is a good
idea". Everything 2 - "even if a person
wanted to go and clone Hitler - let them.
The Hitler they create would have only the
tiniest chance in the universe, considerably
less than winning a lottery, of turning out
even remotely the same. The two Hitler's
wouldn't look anything like each other - our
clone might be short and fat, tall and thin,
excitable or calm, determined by what
childhood he led. His world outlook would
have nothing in common with Hitler, and
No
Cloning will not lead to the mass production
of clones "Why cloning people is a good idea".
Everything 2 - "What about factory producing
children? Long production lines churning out
infants? Dream on fear-mongers. Cloning still
requires mothers to bear the children to term.
There is no such thing as an artificial womb.
Furthermore, there are too many people on this
planet now to even consider the vast population
increases you are fantasizing about. Could Saddam
Hussein clone an army? Yes, but it would be easier
and cheaper just to hire one. He would need
thousands of Iraqi mothers to bear children, who
he would then have to house, feed and educate for
20 years before they would be old enough to fight
for him. He'd be dead of old age long before and
the issue in conflict long forgotten."
Creating better humans through cloning is a
good thing "Why cloning people is a good idea".
Everything 2 - "And what about super-humans?
What about them? Is it not infinitely better for the
human race to be perfectly adapted to its
environment than to struggle along hoping the next
random sexual union will produce a wonder child?
The endless game against nature would be mostly
over. Diseases which have dogged us for
generations could be wiped out due to our evolving
faster than they could ever hope to."
It is baseless that a dictator would build an
army of clones Nathan Myhrvold. "Human Clones:
Why Not? Opposition to cloning isn't just Luddism--
it's racism." Slate.com. March 14, 1997 - "One
recurring image in anti-cloning propaganda is of
some evil dictator raising an army of cloned
even if we force-fed him the same ideology
there would be no guarantee he would
accept it."
Cloning leads to the commodification
and manufacture of humans Aldous
Huxley, Brave New World - "Ninety-six
identical twins working ninety-six identical
machines!” The voice was almost tremulous
with enthusiasm. “You really know where
you are. For the first time in history.” He
quoted the planetary motto. “Community,
Identity, Stability.” Grand words. “If we
could bokanovskify indefinitely the whole
problem would be solved.”
Parental rights: Do parents not have a right to clone?
Yes
Human cloning ends do not justify
means President George W. Bush - "I
strongly oppose human cloning, as do most
Americans. We recoil at the idea of growing
human beings for spare body parts or
creating life for our convenience .... Even
the most noble ends do not justify any
means."[3]
Parents that lose a child should not be
assuaged with a cloned baby.
Family integrity: Does human cloning harm the integrity of the family?
Yes
Reproductive cloning harms the
integrity of the family: Single people will
be able to produce offspring without even
the physical presence of a partner. Once
born, the child will be denied the love of
one parent, most probably the father.
Several theologians have recognised that a
warriors. Excuse me, but who is going to raise such
an army ("raise" in the sense used by parents)?
Clones start out life as babies. Armies are far
easier to raise the old fashioned way--by recruiting
or drafting naive young adults. Dulce et decorum
est pro patria mori has worked well enough to send
countless young men to their deaths through the
ages. Why mess with success?"
All parents will not try to clone the same kind
of individual "Why cloning people is a good idea".
Everything 2 - "What about blue-haired blond-
eyes? Well, personally, if I wanted to clone a kid
there's no way they would be Aryan. No Asian
couple would choose the stereotypical Western
child either. No Africans would go for that
Caucasian look. The concept of everyone designing
the same child is in itself ridiculous, as humans
have a tendency to express themselves as
individually as possible. A couple would design a
child like no other. Having the freedom to create
any child would enhance individuality creating
more unique offspring rather than less unique
ones."
No
If women have a right to reproduce, society
can't say "not by cloning" Nathan Myhrvold.
"Human Clones: Why Not? Opposition to cloning
isn't just Luddism--it's racism." Slate.com. March
14, 1997 - "If humans have a right to reproduce,
what right does society have to limit the means?
Essentially all reproduction is done these days with
medical help--at delivery, and often before. Truly
natural human reproduction would mean 50
percent infant mortality and make pregnancy-
related death the No. 1 killer of adult women."
Opponents of cloning must tolerate the
practice. "Human Cloning is Good". Help Me.com -
"Freedom sometimes means having tolerance for
others and their beliefs. In our society today, some
people believe there should be gun control while
others do not. Everyone is free to decide what
faith, or religion they will follow. Pro cloning
individuals feel that in a free society we know that
we must tolerate some views that we don't agree
with, this is what make our freedom so valuable,
we have the right to choose."
No
Cloned babies would be loved by parents that
choose to have them There is no reason to
believe that parents choosing to clone a child will
not love their cloned-child as fully as they would
love a procreated-child.
Parental motives can't be used against
cloning and not normal child-
child is a symbolic expression of the mutual
love of its parents, and their hope for the
future. This sign of love is lost when a
child’s life begins in a laboratory.
Cloning undermines the natural
relationship between procreation and
familyPamela Schaeffer. "Special Section:
Human Destiny. Many oppose human
cloning". National Catholic Reporter - "The
Vatican opposes cloning humans, in part,
because it is a means of reproduction that,
like in vitro fertilization, does not derive
directly from sexual intercourse between a
married man and woman. In fact, more
than any other reproductive technology,
cloning threatens to sever the link between
sex, marriage and reproduction, and to
render the male role in reproduction
obsolete."
Cloning treats children as
objects: Children will be manufactured by
an expensive technological process that is
subject to quality control. The gulf between
an artisan and an artefact is immense.
Individuals will be able to have a child for
the sake of having children, or as a symbol
of status, rather than because they desire
to conceive, love and raise another human
being. Cloning will not only allow, but
actually encourage, the commodification of
people.
Parents will suffer identity problems
trying to raise a clone.
Human cloning turns the parent into a
despot over their child
Cloning will involve the creation of
children for predetermined roles. A
father that desires a star football player for
a son may seek cloning for these purposes.
Diversity: Will cloning lower genetic diversity in human populations?
Yes
Human cloning reduces biological
diversity in the human
population. "Why Environmentalists
Oppose Human Cloning And Inheritable
Genetic Modification". Friends of the Earth.
Retrieved June 3rd, 2008
- "Ensuring Diversity & Ecosystem Survival
Cloning represents a fundamental shift in
our relationship with nature. It is a break
from the process of natural evolution
known to build strength into species
through diversity. It is the ultimate in
monoculture.
In this “brave new world,” any distinction
between the natural and the technological
will be erased, deepening an alienation that
fosters destructive behavior toward
ecosystems. Why, for instance, protect
rearingFurthermore, we should not pretend that
every child conceived by sexual procreation is born
to wholly well-intentioned parents. The desire to
have ‘a son and heir’ is common around the world
but does not concern the welfare of the future
child. Similarly, children are often conceived out of
marital custom, in order to consolidate a
relationship, or even in order to gain free
accommodation from local housing authorities.
Finally, many children are not intended at all, but
are born as a result of unplanned pregnancies.
There would be no fear of ‘accidental cloning’ that
could bring a child to a parent who was
unprepared, or unwilling, to love it.
The "family integrity" argument is wholly
unsuited to the modern age. Society freely
allows single people to reproduce sexually, whether
by accident or design. Existing lawful practices
such as sperm donation allow deliberate
procreation without knowledge of the identity of
the father. Surely it is preferable for a mother to
know the genetic heritage of her offspring, rather
than accept sperm from an unknown and random
donor? Moreover, reproductive cloning will allow
lesbian couples to have children genetically related
to them both. It might be better for the welfare of
the child for it to be born into a happy relationship,
but the high rates of single parenthood and divorce
suggest that this is not always possible.
Cloning is more predictable than natural
reproduction
Cloning-reproduction would never compete
with sex-reproduction
No
Human clones will not reduce human
biological diversity The expense and time
necessary for successful human cloning should
mean that it will only be used to the benefit of the
small minority of people who require the
technology. The pleasure of procreation through
sexual intercourse does not suggest that whole
populations will prefer to reproduce asexually
through cloning. The only significant lack of
diversity which can be expected will be in women
who suffer from a severe mitochondrial disease.
They will be able to use cloning by nuclear transfer
in order to avoid passing on the disease which is
carried in their egg cells to any offspring. This
elimination of harmful genetic traits from the gene
pool is no different from the eradication of
infectious disease, such as small pox, and should
be welcomed.
habitat when a few cloned trophy
specimens could be perpetuated in zoos?"
Human cloning is a threat to the
environment in terms of irreversible
changes to our nature..

Infertility: Is it wrong for infertile couples to seek a cloned child?

Yes
The ends don't justify the means in
cloning a child. Even if there is a utility
for infertile parents, the ends (obtaining a
child) don't justify the means (human
cloning).
By the will of nature/God infertile
couples are not meant to
reproduce Nobody has a right to have a
child. If someone is infertile, they were
likely meant to remain infertile and go
without a child.
No
Cloning allows gay couples to have children of
their own blood
Human cloning would enable infertile couples
to have children "Human Cloning is Good". Help
Me.com - "Many other individual supports believe
that with cloning, infertile couples could have
children. Despite getting a fair amount of publicity
in the news current treatments for infertility, in
terms of percentages, are not very successful. One
estimate is that current infertility treatments are
less than 10 percent successful. Couples go
through physically and emotionally painful
procedures for a small chance of having children.
Many couples run out of time and money without
successfully having children."

Equality: Will human reproductive cloning lead to greater social inequality?

Yes No
Human cloning will increase
inequalities in society "Why
Environmentalists Oppose Human Cloning
And Inheritable Genetic Modification".
Friends of the Earth. Retrieved June 3rd,
2008 - "Justice and Equity. Many
environmental organizations work for
environmental and social justice and are
deeply concerned about the pollution
burdens that have been placed on
minorities and the poor. Cloning and
inheritable modification have the potential
to generate greater inequalities among
people and societies."

Value: Is human cloning unnecessary to the advancement of humanity?

Yes
Human reproductive cloning is
unnecessary: The development of in vitro
fertilisation and the practice of sperm
donation allows heterosexual couples to
reproduce where one partner is sterile.
Moreover, merely 300 babies are adopted
each year in the United Kingdom. It might
be better for potential parents to give their
love to existing babies rather than attempt
to bring their own offspring into an already
crowded world.
No
The desire to have one’s own child and to
nurture it is wholly natural: The longing for a
child genetically related to oneself existed long
before biotechnology, but it is only recently that
medicine has been able to satisfy it. In vitro
fertilisation remains an imperfect technology.
Couples typically submit to four cycles of costly
treatment before producing a child. Evidently, the
technique does not assist homosexual couples,
couples where both partners lack gametes, or
where the female partner suffers from a
mitochondrial disease. Cloning would allow a child
to be born to all these couples.