Certainly I see no reason why society should prevent grieving parents from having a baby cloned from the cells of a dead child if they wish.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
There is a pent-up demand from people who want to clone their dead children.
Like the 'test tube babies' born of in vitro fertilization, cloned children need not be identifiable, much less freaks or outcasts.
I think we can allow the therapeutic uses of nuclear transplant technology, which we call cloning, without running the danger of actually having live human beings born.
We're not really under pressure to deliver a cloned baby to this world. What we are under pressure to do is to deliver a cloned baby that is a healthy one.
I take the view that anything you can do to relieve suffering or improve human health will usually be widely accepted by the public - that is to say, if cloning actually turned out to be solving some problems and was useful to people, I think it would be accepted.
I would not want to see any relaxation of the law prohibiting human cloning.
There is absolutely no doubt about it, and I may not be the one that does it, but the cloned child is coming. There is absolutely no way that it will not happen.
I am in favor of stem-cell research. I am not in favor of creating new human embryos through cloning.
Cloning looks like a degrading of parenthood and a perversion of the right relation between parents and children.
We're not interested in cloning the Michael Jordans and Michael Jacksons of the world, but rather assisting infertile couples that deserve the right to have a biological child to have one.