Date of Award

Spring 1999

Document Type





This Honors Thesis will examine the position of the National Bioethics Advisory Commission (NBAC) on human cloning. This examination includes looking at the position of the NBAC through three different sets of eyes, in order to come to a clear understanding of what their position is and whether or not it is correct. The chapter on biology will explain the facts of human cloning in order to discuss several popular myths of cloning and hopefully dispel them from further discussions. The legal chapter gives a history of human cloning in the United States’ legal system, which shows how the NBAC has come about and the previous action that was not taken on this technology. The metaphysics chapter examines three questions that, along with the biological chapter’s findings, discredit two of the NBAC’s five main ethical issues with human cloning. Finally, the ethical chapter brings the previous three chapters together to discuss the three ethical questions that remain from the NBAC’s report. These questions are as follows. First, does the possibility of doing physical damage to clones without the proper development of techniques make cloning morally wrong? Second, do the harmful effects on family and societal roles and values outweigh the benefits of cloning? Last, does cloning cause us to treat clones as objects? The conclusion of this ethical investigation is that in fact the NBAC’s recommendation was correct and they have proposed three ethical issues that make the cloning of humans ethically unacceptable. In conclusion, the solution of beginning more worldwide debates on cloning is given. I feel that these debates are the only way that people will become educated on the facts of cloning and come to a decision that is cross-culturally accepted by the majority of the people that it would affect... all of us.