Abstract

In this dissertation I take on the task of reconstructing and evaluating arguments for and against human cloning for both research and reproduction, and conclude that the moral disagreement is really about how to define "moral status" and not about cloning in particular. In Chapter I, I clarify the biological and scientific facts relevant to the human cloning debate. I then give a topic neutral definition of cloning, and show what the moral problems seem to be. ;Chapter II evaluates the common moral theories that are used in philosophical arguments against human cloning: Consequentialism , Deontology , and Virtue Theory . What I show is that contrary to the popular opinion their arguments are not limited to just the common "means as end" and "harm" debates, but include interesting philosophical issues of right, non-identity, and moral status. ;Chapter III concerns itself with a set of objections to human cloning that comes from religious thinkers. I show that most of the religious objections like "playing God" and "unnatural" are not cogent. I spend the last third of the chapter evaluating Kass's argument that cloning is repugnant. ;Chapter IV deals with the important legal argument in the bioethics debates. The proponents of human cloning generally subsume the cloning questions under the rubric of reproductive rights. I argue that one of the best defenses of human cloning is when human cloning is understood as a reproductive rights issue. I argue for this right using two Supreme Court cases: Roe v. Wade and Griswold v. Connecticut. ;Chapter V attempts to define "moral status." I show that even though we cannot give necessary and sufficient conditions for moral status simpliciter, we can give some necessary and some sufficient conditions for moral status that are relevant to the moral assessment of biomedical issues. If we accept these conditions in a manner that is topic neutral with respect to moral theories, then I argue that human cloning is permissible. The same can be said for abortion, stem cell research, and euthanasia. I conclude that a complete ban on human cloning is unwarranted at this time