How do these commercial interests argue against a real ban on human cloning?
They do not say they favor human cloning or destructive embryo experiments, because they know public opinion would be against them on those grounds. Instead they argue, for example, that the Bond/Frist/Lott bill and similar proposals are vaguely worded and will end up banning all kinds of procedures to which people have no ethical objection — e.g., cloning cells, tissues, and animals. What is the truth about these claims? They are false. The Bond/Frist/Lott bill bans cloning only when it produces a human embryo. A similar House bill by Rep. Ehlers specifically exempts use of cloning to produce “animals other than humans” or to produce “molecules, DNA, cells other than human embryo cells, or tissues.” What can we expect from this debate in the near future? Cloning advocates and pro-abortion groups will complain that “abortion politics” is interfering with scientific research. Pro-life groups will point out that legislation is necessary to prevent an abortion mentality from driving the
