Throughout history, as science has continuously advanced, human cloning has become less of a fantasy and more of an actual reality. Plant cloning has developed into animal cloning, and will soon lead into a realm of possibilities with human cloning. A clone is defined as “a molecule, cell, or organism that is genetically identical to its parental molecule, cell, or organism” (Petechuk). Scientists have been interested in whether or not cells can grow into identical organisms since the nineteenth century. If and when scientists reach the possibility of human cloning, the question will arise of whether or not it should be prohibited. Full body cloning of humans should not be permitted. Having already successfully cloned plants and animals, scientists are now trying to extend the cloning process onto humans; however, human cloning should not be considered as it would reduce the value of human life and disrupt the natural selection process.

INDIVIDUALITY OF HUMAN BEINGS
There are no people that are exactly alike in personality. Although they may look the same, people are always very different from each other. Therefore if there were exact copies of people walking around, those people may lose their individuality. With each new copy of that person made, the value of their life may seem to decrease. However, if human clones were made and were different based on the environments that they lived in, this would not be a problem. Even if clones were known to have different personalities, they would still probably be seen as lesser to people who do not know them personally. If people just see the clones from a far away distance, like on televison, then it becomes less personal. Since the public do not personally know the clones, they may think that they do not have feelings or are not the same as them. Clones may be seen as indispensable since there's another copy just like it. Human cloning may lead to decreased individuality of a human being.

THE FATE OF NATURAL SELECTION
Natural selection defined is the process by which individuals with genes or traits that give them advantages will continue on more so than those who do not have any advantageous traits (Pianka). Human cloning would disrupt the process of natural selection. If clones were developed of a person with certain advantages, then there would be no need for natural selection and it’s place in nature would be disrupted. Without natural selection, evolution would not take place. This would cause a large unbalance in the environment. For example, if many clones were made of a person who was impervious to pain, then the natural selection process would be disrupted due to the course of scientists speeding along the process instead of letting it happen naturally.

Cloning full body humans would come with another cost. “At a minimum, cloning eliminates genetic variation and thus, can be detrimental in the long term, leading to inbreeding and increased susceptibility to diseases” (Petechuk). If many people were cloned and were identical, then they would all be affected by the same disease. This would cause an immense problem, because if many people were cloned, they could all be wiped out in an instant. This makes human cloning a risky business, and that risk should not be taken. If hypothetically a small population of people were made out of clones, a single disease that kills one would eliminate all the others as well, resulting in the extinction of that certain clone species. Human cloning should not be allowed because there is too much of a risk that the clones may be eliminated by one single disease.

CLONE RIGHTS
Even though clones are human too, they are a different kind of human than non-cloned people. Where people are conceived and are given birth by, human clones are grown from cells of the person they are being cloned of. This would create a rift between cloned people and non-cloned people. Already today, racism and sexism exist simply because people are different than other people. If human clones were to be permitted, a huge controversy would also be created along with it. The question of what rights would be given to them would cause a huge uproar between the American public. Whenever something is introduced that is different, or in this case the exact same, people tend to hate it or love it. Therefore, human cloning should not be allowed because “clonesim” will appear and people may become hostile towards clones, causing an uproar in the world.

COUNTER ARGUMENT
If human cloning was in fact prohibited, scientists could exercise their first amendment rights. If the government banned human cloning or aspects of human cloning, then scientists could fight this ban by claiming that it is infringing upon their first amendment rights (Foley). Since the First Amendment includes the freedom of expression, scientists could argue that experimenting to bring clones into the world is part of their expression. The government would have to go to court with the certain scientists that are testing to create human cloning, creating a controversy in both the scientific world and the governmental one.

Although clones may be more susceptible to diseases, they could also be used to cure diseases. They could be used to treat diseases such as cancer and diabetes. However, this would be highly unethical. Testing on these human clones to treat such genetic diseases would just as well be the same as testing on humans that are not clones. Even though they do not come from the same place, they are still adapted after humans and should be treated a such. Although it would be helpful to test on them to help cure genetic diseases, it would be highly unethical and should not be allowed.

SOLUTION
Full body human cloning should not be allowed, but instead a different type of cloning should. The different perspective on human cloning is called human therapeutic cloning. “Human therapeutic cloning could play an important role in regenerative medicine by providing embryonic stem cells for treatment that are derived from the patient’s own cells” (Aldridge). Instead of creating full body clones and harvesting organs from them, scientists could take cells from patient’s bodys and create organs for their use. Therapeutic cloning is cloning only parts of a human being instead of a whole one, and therefore creates fewer problems. Instead of causing more problems, this type of cloning could help further scientific discoveries and  help doctors everywhere provide patients with the organs they need.

CONCLUSION
As human cloning becomes more of a possibility, it also becomes more of a problem that will have to be dealt with. Having already successfully cloned plants and animals, scientists are now trying to extend the cloning process onto humans; however, human cloning should not be  considered as it would reduce the value of human life and disrupt the natural selection process. Because there would be more than one version of a person, some people may see that as the value and individuality of that person decreasing. The fact that people would be cloned would also disrupt the process of natural selection, which would in turn disrupt the evolution of humans in general. It would also make all the clones made after one person more susceptible to a certain disease, and it could wipe out every clone like that because they are genetically the same. The creation of clones would also create the idea of hate against clones, resulting in crimes against clones. Instead of full body human cloning, a different kind of cloning called therapeutic cloning should be used instead. This clones only part of the body instead of the whole body, resulting in fewer problems. Although human cloning may sound exciting at first, it has many downsides and should not be allowed in the world.