Animal cloning has become a reality, with sheep, mice, cattle, goats, monkeys, and pigs having been cloned. An endangered animal, the Asian gaur has also been cloned. Scientists clone animals for the purpose of creating genetically improved livestock; monkeys and mice can be cloned to facilitate the testing of medicines and products; cloned pigs could one day provide a genetically engineered source of organ transplants for humans; endangered animals can be saved. Animal cloning has a purpose.

An increasing number of scientists and members of the public are expressing strong desires to carry out human cloning.

I cannot help but have mixed feelings on human cloning. I am unable to avoid the more superstitious doubt that clones do not have souls. Roman Catholics believe that the soul enters the body upon conception. However, I am not so sure. God creates clones about 4000 times a day when He creates natural twins, but it does not make it right for scientists to carry out cloning as it would mean interfering with God's work. Although I am not a Roman Catholic, I believe that cloning is unnatural as no possible benefits can justify the interference with God's work.

On the other hand, human cloning can bring about great medical benefits through stem cell research. Scientists say that cloning of human embryos could bring about huge progress in creating cures for diseases such as Parkinson's, diabetes, Alzheimer's and paralysis. Other reasons why people want cloning include cloning their dead children or parents, or creating clones to provide organs to save their or their children? lives. Homosexual couples can also have children through cloning. Some selfish reasons include people wanting to create "designer babies" with high IQ or good looks, or people wanting to cheat death by having their genetic clone live on.

My final stand is that human cloning should not be carried out at this stage of time, where animal cloning is not even perfected yet. Even after four years of practice with animal cloning, the failure rate is still overwhelming: 98% of embryos never implant or die off during gestation or soon after birth. Many babies are also born with numerous malformations. It took 277 attempts to clone Dolly, 274 attempts to clone Cumulina, 110 times to clone Xena. 368 embryos formed by splitting 107 embryos into two or four pieces and then implanted into surrogate mothers only resulted in one Tetra, the rhesus monkey. Hence the failure rate for animal cloning is seen to be vastly overwhelming. Trying to clone a dead child now would most likely mean another dead child, which will be devastating to the parents.

Even if cloning is made commercially viable and legal in the future, when is enough enough? Would it be alright to clone a person a hundred times?

Personally, I think that cloning research should be given the go ahead. No doubt there is a serious concern about the dangers of cloning at this time, given all the uncertainty and random 'hit-or-miss' nature of cloning experiments right now. However, I think this is precisely why we should carry out further research on cloning. We must not ignore the many benefits that human cloning would bring us should it become a reality. Therefore, we should try as much as possible to understand the whole process of cloning - a process which is not new to the world, because nature itself has been carrying it out for years.

Further research, in the meantime, should be carried out starting right from the bottom. From that, I mean scientists should start from working on animals which are easiest to clone, and only when they have perfected a method of producing a clone with as little side effects and danger as possible, should they move on to an animal which is less easy to clone. By working their way up, and not being over-ambitious and wanting to clone humans right away, they can do away with not just a lot of errors, dangers and failures, but also with a huge amount of controversy that surrounds the ethical concerns of exposing human embryos to blatant danger. Scientists should realise that where it concerns human lives, even of those which at the time being do not look like humans, experiments carried out in a trial-and-error method is completely unacceptable to most of the world.

However, looking at sinister predictions of the future should human cloning fall in the hands of people who abuse it, I think the objections and aversion of many people towards the subject of cloning are not unfounded. However, we cannot afford to bury our heads in the sand. If cloning is not legally allowed, I'm certain there will be underground research going on anyway, given the benefits and rewards that can be reaped from a fruitful find. Then, without the government to control and regulate who and how many people get to make use of this process, abusers, both of the process and of such a situation, will certainly be rampant. This is much like the case of heroin, where the traffickers and producers make millions from their trade, while millions die from ignorant and abusive heroin usage. Cigarettes, on the other hand, are harmful and addictive just like heroin.

However, because the government didn't ban it, it, for one, lost its 'forbidden fruit' appeal. Although there are still abusers of cigarettes, at least the government is able to impose an age limit and can make sure distributors take responsibility for the way their products are sold. Similarly, if the government legalises cloning, it will be able to regulate it. Furthermore, since cloning can hardly be considered an 'over-the-counter' business, governments can take sole control of it, with, say, only one centre being legalised to carry out cloning. With sufficient funding to bring down the cost (lower than the 'black market' cloners), and efficient administration, people will be much less likely to approach those who are carrying the process out underground. This is because approaching the governmentally controlled centre is cheaper, does not involve endless paperwork and waiting and, best of all, they will not be jailed for it. Thus, the government can make sure that only people like homosexual couples and infertile couples or couples with hereditary diseases, get to make use of cloning. Underground cloners, unable to cover their costs, would most likely give up their trade then.

Therefore, I am very much for the legalising of cloning research, since that not only brings mankind great benefits, but also reduces the chances of people being able to abuse cloning should it become viable one day.

Cloning has the power to create life, yes… this is indeed a prerogative of God, and him alone. I cannot refute this statement, and I will not even try to.

Arthur C. Clark once said, "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."

Cloning is an amazing technological breakthrough indeed. Frankly, I believe it has great potential and will eventually help mankind in a big way. However, there is widespread concern that human cloning is against God’s will and it should not be permitted. On the contrary, I believe that God is always ahead of man, and it is through him that man has acquired this knowledge and developed science thus far. Why not think of cloning as something God had meant for us, anyway?

Control is the key to cloning. I think tight safety measures should be exercised to keep cloning to a limit. Firstly, it is vital that the process has been fully researched upon. Eventually, when it has been deemed completely safe and free of side effects, cloning can and should be extended to humans. This I say, because cloning can benefit man in ways more than one. For example, dying people can be saved with the aid of transplants and blood transfusions from clones.

Further concerns question the state of cloning, should it fall into wrong hands. However, it is not fair to ban cloning, just because it might be used for immoral purposes. At this point in time, we are still in the early stages of cloning, and we have no idea of the benefits, and yes, the liabilities too. We should not deprive future generations of something that might develop in something so multi-faceted and utilitarian.

At this juncture, I’d like to make a reference to IVF, that is,  in-vitro fertilization. When it was made possible in England about 20 years back, IVF was banned in many countries worldwide. However, after the methods were perfected and made innocuous, countries lifted the ban, and the technology has resulted in many otherwise infertile women being able to bear children. Likewise, cloning has the capacity to develop into a life-saver of sorts for many people.

Whether or not a human should be brought to Earth depends very much on nature. Most importantly, it depends on God's will. This is a very strong factor why we should not clone humans. Are we in such a desperate state that we must reproduce humans via artificial means? If it is willed that our child should be born with genetic defects, let it be so. If it is willed that a couple should not have any kids, let it be so.

I am concerned about the rising demands and curiosity where cloning in concerned. No doubt, cloning brings about many beneficial things in terms of medication, a couple's ability to have children as well as passing down the desirable genes from a person. However, all these do not matter very much to me. I feel that the technology for the advancement for science and medicine definitely has a long way to go, but it can still carry on if we forgo cloning.

Now, we have cloning. What will we have 100 years down the road? I dare not imagine how the development of science will when scientists can no longer see the fine line between humanity and logic. This thought alone is enough to make me shudder.

We are taking nature into our own hands by cloning animals or people. Religious organizations consider nuclear transfer to cause men to be reproductively obsolete, and I absolutely agree with this. This claim was deduced by gathering of the information that cloning requires only oocytes, any cell, and a woman to develop in. They also claim that cloning does not respect the fact that humans have souls. In fact, I feel that cloning a human is equivalent to destructing respect for a human. Not many will agree with my point but my stand against human cloning remains clear and will be so. Period.

Cloning is also unnatural and we are taking the work of God into our own hands. Although he did ask us to "be fruitful and multiply, and fill the Earth...", I am sure it is not be this unnatural means that he wants his creation to multiply.

Nothing is more beautiful in life as Earth's greatest gift, nature.