Cloning has created controversy about everything from its ethical validity to its unnatural practice. Predictions of ways it will be manipulated for misuse has over taken the idea of cloning potentially being beneficial. Dismissing cloning could be a big mistake, since it could be beneficial.
Many people who oppose this viewpoint are mostly misinformed about cloning. Television, books, radio, and people's own ideas have given cloning a bad stereotype. The main opposing argument is that clones will not have any uniqueness or personality of their own. This is where many people are wrong. Nature has been making its own clones for millions of years in the form of identical twins. Studies show that identical twins, humans with the same genetic makeup, have many similarities, but that they also have different personalities and their own uniqueness. Our individuality comes from our environment and surroundings. (Nature vs. Nurture)
There are three basic arguments opposing cloning: cloning is not natural; it has potential for misuse; and it's immoral.
The problem with the argument that cloning is unnatural is that many things today are not natural: disease vaccinations, trips to the doctor, your house, even the clothes you wear. If we were to travel back to "natural," we would never have any creations to improve life. What if man was never to fight plagues, improve daily life, or advance technologically just because the practice is not natural? This cannot be held against cloning because we have been "unnatural" for thousands of years.
Another major argument against cloning is that it will be misused if the wrong people get hold of it. This drawback is true, but only to the extent that everything around us has potential of misuse when put in the wrong hands. If cloning is correctly used, the...