ABSTRACT
When Dolly the sheep was introduced to the scientific community and the press in February (23, 1997), public debate instantly crystalised around the ethical acceptability of cloning humans. Several scenarios repeated themselves with generic regularity, such as the possible cloning of ‘evil’ dictators such as Hitler or Saddam Hussein, and the converse possibility of cloning ‘geniuses’, movie stars, or athletes, or the possibility for wealthy billionaires to clone themselves. The overwhelming opinion expressed by commentators, columnists and scientific journalists around the world was that human cloning is neither a realistic nor a morally defensible option. Dr Ian Wilmut of the Roslin Institute, as well as Dr Ron James of PPL Therapeutics, were both widely quoted expressing their opposition to the attempt to clone humans. President Clinton called for an immediate moratorium on such activities. As the former Archbishop of York, John Habgood, put the matter succinctly: ‘I cannot see any morally convincing reason why anybody should want to clone a human being, and some good reasons why they should not’ (The Observer, 2 March 1997, p. 27).
