ARGUMENTS USED AGAINST AND IN DEFENSE OF HUMAN CLONING:
AGAINST:
Cloning might lead to the creation of genetically engineered groups of people for specific purposes, such as warfare or slavery.
Cloning might lead to an attempt to improve the human race according to an arbitrary standard.
Cloning could result in the introduction of additional defects in the human gene pool.
Cloning is unsafe. There are too many unknown factors that could adversely affect the offspring.
A close might have a dimished sense of individuality.
A clone might have fewer rights than other people.
Doctors might use clones as sources of organs for organ transplants
Cloning is at odds with the traditional concept of family.
Cloning is against God's will.
Some aspects of human life should ge off limits to science.
IN DEFENSE OF:
Cloning would enable infertile couples to have children of their own.
Cloning would give couples who are at risk of producing a child with a genetic defect the chance to produce a healthy child.
Cloning could shed light on how genes work and lead to the discovery of new treatments for genetic diseases.
A ban on cloning may be unconstitutional. It would deprive people of the right to reporduce and restrict the freedom of scientists.
A clone would not really bea duplicate, because environmental factors would mold him or her into a unique individual.
A clone would have as much of a sense of individuality as do twins.
A clone would have the same rights as do all other people.
Cloning is comparable in safety to a number of other medical procedures.
Objections to cloning are similar to objections raised against previous scientific achievements, for example, heart transplants and test-tube babies, that later came to be widely accepted.
