STAFF EDIT: Human cloning ban premature

Strange mutant creatures, scientific breakthroughs or merely another way to overcome infertility could come from human cloning. While the Great Debate’s audience on Wednesday night decided in favor of a ban on human cloning, research avenues should be left open simply because its results are unknown.

Cloning humans would involve transferring a somatic or non-reproductive human cell to a woman’s egg, going far beyond current research attempting the same process with animals like Dolly the sheep or with human stem cells. Many opponents argue that this research would not safely or effectively clone a human, and complicated moral issues come into play. Would overcoming natural obstacles to reproduction cause problems similar to inbreeding? Is this research even necessary? Could this eventually allow parents to modify their child before inception and erase the natural randomness of reproduction and impede evolution? If cloning attempts are allowed, at what point can scientists decide too much has gone wrong when other methods still remain untested?

No one knows the answers to these questions, but that is precisely why human cloning should not be banned. Scientists are not ready to fully attempt human cloning now, but they might be someday. Passing a ban now would prevent initial research and would be difficult to overturn later on. Regardless of how many preliminary studies take place, officials and citizens can never know if human cloning will work until scientists actually try it.

While cloning humans from somatic cells could allow infertile couples and lesbian couples to have children biologically related to them, it should not be blocked because other amazing breakthroughs could also occur. An overwhelming number of scientific breakthroughs from pharmaceuticals to Silly Putty have happened by trying to do something else. Besides the results scientists expect to happen, they could make many other discoveries in the process of trying to clone humans. For example, even if a few mistakes happen, a utilitarianism approach indicates they would be worth finding a cure for AIDS, which would benefit millions of people.

Because carrying on one’s seed and having biologically-related children are so important to many people, they will pursue new cloning technologies regardless of whether they are allowed in the United States. Rather than allow this industry to develop into a black market similar to those existing for drugs or weapons, tight regulation could allow U.S. scientists to pursue this slowly and carefully. This research would report results accurately and could set a standard for the rest of the world to follow.

Human cloning certainly prompts strong moral objections and adamant supporters, as shown by the Great Debate’s audience, which was so closely divided that moderator Bob Zelnick had to change his initial ruling. However, the opinions are all based on assumptions or fears of what will happen if this research is allowed. Because no one has the slightest idea what will happen yet, this area of research has no reason to be banned now.