Human Reproductive Cloning

It is currently impossible to successfully clone a human being. It will remain impossible for years, possibly decades to come. Human cloning should not be done at this point in development.

Reproductive cloning is currently almost universally condemned. One of the reasons is that it is currently impossible. The idea of creating hundreds or thousands of malformed organisms doomed to die in the quest for a human clone is offensive to everyone.

A second reason is the fear of designer babies. It is feared that human cloning technology will make designer babies more possible and this instills a fear of some new super race arising and rendering humanity obsolete, or it might be used for growing human clones for spare parts.

A third reason for condemning reproductive cloning is the moral condemnation of playing God. It seems sick to want to have an exact duplicate of yourself walking around.

The first reason is obviously valid. Clearly human reproductive cloning should be forbidden until the technology has been developed to a point where it is safe and effective.

The other two reasons are basically rationalizations of fear of the unknown. Fear of the unknown is not a good reason for passing laws. Vague superstitious apprehensions about something that might happen if a technology is used in a certain way that might even turn out to be impossible do not constitute valid reasons for outlawing something.

The idea of raising clones for spare parts is popular in science fiction. It seems economically impossible. Consider the cost in growing an entire human body when you only need one organ. It takes a lot of time and money for a child to grow up into an adult so that its organs would be large enough to be serviceable. Each such clone would cost millions of dollars and develop very slowly. It is difficult to believe that such a procedure would ever be time or cost effective compared to more likely scenarios such as growing an individual organ, or injecting adult stem cells into the organ in the patients body to allow it to heal itself.

It is also difficult to accept the fear of designer babies and some kind of new super race as possible. Evolution is a very efficient mechanism, and it is unlikely that in the near future we are going to be able to improve on its general model of humanity. Correct some genetic problems, prevent some genetic diseases, etc. yes, these are possible. To actually create a new model which is an improvement on the best of the original is highly unlikely. There is a give and take in the design process. Improve here and you lose there. Create an organism with extreme ability in one area and it may be unable to function normally in many others. Try to artificially raise IQ’s beyond what occurs naturally and you may get autistic savants.

There are social advantages to reproductive cloning. The role of nurture in producing the final form of the human being is generally underestimated. A population of clones growing up twenty or thirty or forty years after their originals would be very different from their originals. This would illustrate in a graphic way the importance of nurture in the development of human beings.

A population of such clones would provide a possibility for scientific research into the nature vs. nurture debate which could not be created in any other way.

Once cloning becomes technologically possible the question of whether or not to have a child cloned is a personal, religious, moral question. The State does not have a right to outlaw such a procedure if it is safe. In questions of this sort the preference should always be given to the rights of the individual.

If individuals desire to be cloned after the technology is developed, the potential benefits to society are equal to the risks and the State has no right to interfere.

Reproductive cloning should be illegal until it is safe and then the choice should be left to the individuals concerned.