Human cloning is not only morally repugnant; it is not scientifically viable at this stage. As a news source and a source of public opinion, the Monroe Evening News has a direct responsibility to take a stance on banning human cloning. My personal opinion reflects a broader fear in our society that permission granted to scientific institutes to practice human cloning will have detrimental consequences.

This fear is not, as some would believe, based solely on religious values, although it may be. Religious beliefs should not influence public policy, however. What should influence public policy is science. Many scientists oppose human cloning and do not espouse it just because it is possible. While there are some potential benefits to human cloning, such as organ harvesting, these "benefits" must be weighed and examined in light of their consequences. When a new human being is created in the laboratory, what rights does it have? Does a fully formed clone deserve the right to refuse the harvesting of his or her organs?

Moreover, human clones will not, at this stage, be healthy creatures. The early experiments with animal cloning suggest that human clones would be born with physical defects or mental maladies. This is cruel enough and painful enough to witness in our animal friends. To create a physical, sentient being knowingly prone to illness or defect would be inhumane and destructive. It is also a highly selfish endeavor. Many scientists seem to covet cloning for personal gain. Others seem to desire to create a stash of human clones in a futile search for immortality. Instead of creating clones, scientists should spend more time and research on curing AIDS and cancer. The government, too, can devote money to much greater causes. You as a major media source should take a definite and fearless stand on this controversial issue.