title: Procreative liberty, enhancement and commodification in the human cloning debate.
abstract: The aim of this paper is to scrutinize a contemporary standoff in the American debate over the moral permissibility of human reproductive cloning in its prospective use as a eugenic enhancement technology. I shall argue that there is some significant and under-appreciated common ground between the defenders and opponents of human cloning. Champions of the moral and legal permissibility of cloning support the technology based on the right to procreative liberty provided it were to become as safe as in vitro fertilization and that it be used only by adults who seek to rear their clone children. However, even champions of procreative liberty oppose the commodification of cloned embryos, and, by extension, the resulting commodification of the cloned children who would be produced via such embryos. I suggest that a Kantian moral argument against the use of cloning as an enhancement technology can be shown to be already implicitly accepted to some extent by champions of procreative liberty on the matter of commodification of cloned embryos. It is in this argument against commodification that the most vocal critics of cloning such as Leon Kass and defenders of cloning such as John Robertson can find greater common ground. Thus, I endeavor to advance the debate by revealing a greater degree of moral agreement on some fundamental premises than hitherto recognized.
authors.affiliation: Department of Philosophy, Indiana University, 1033 E. Third St. Sycamore Hall 026, Bloomington, IN 47405-7005, USA. sshapsha@indiana.edu
authors.forename: Sandra
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Shapshay
mesh_terms: D019976:Cloning, Organism / Q000941:ethics*; D005053:Eugenics; D006806:Human Rights; D006801:Humans; D009014:Morals; D014481:United States