의학의 발달에 함축된 윤리적 물음: 인간 복제를 중심으로*

In this article, I inquire into ethical problems in cloning through somatic cell transfer. Cloning is divided into two ; animal cloning and human cloning. Animal cloning, combined with genetics, is useful in producing transgenic food or remedying human diseases. It can exert a negative influence upon ecological system. For it can destroy genetic diversity in nature and bring a new species into nature. However, this is a practical objection. Ethical objections to animal cloning are grounded on animal rights and the order of nature. That is, animal cloning violates animal rights to life and is contrary to the order of nature. But these theoretical objections uncritically presuppose that animals have rights to life and there clearly exist the order in nature. These premises are not regarded as true.

Human cloning includes much more ethical problems. It can be divided into human cloning for therapy and one for reproduction. As for the latter, proponents of cloning claim the freedom of reproduction. Anyone does not have the right to infringe on other individual’s right such as freedom of reproduction. Many people worry about individual cloning for reproduction. For it is asexual reproduction ; a cloned human is the single-parent child. Asexual reproduction is contrary to the meaning of sexuality in bringing forth a new life. Everyone has the right to be the product of the mixture of the genes of two individuals. Human cloning infringes on this right. First, cloning threatens self-identity of cloned humans. Second, human cloning represents a giant step toward turning procreation into manufacture. It means that a cloner can dominate over a cloned human. This domination is profoundly dehumanizing. Third, human cloning can break the traditional relationship between parents and children.

Therapeutic human cloning has no ethical problems as stated above. But cloned embryos are used for research or as a means to another human beings. This raises the problem of the moral standing of pre-embryos. Proponents of embryo cloning claim that embryos have no moral standing because they have yet no individuality. In realty, scientists can already use embryos in in-vitro fertilization. But objection to embryo cloning is grounded upon a slippery slope argument ; if cloning embryo is permissible, it is practically impossible to prevent someone from cloning human being. Though pre-embryos have no moral standing, they only have potentiality to become a human being. So we must have a duty to take a special care of pre-embryos.

I conclude that cloning animals is ethically permissible, with proviso that it has no practical problems such as destroying the ecological system. However, cloning individual human being is ethically impermissible because it ignores the meanings of sexuality in bringing forth a new life. As for embryo cloning for therapy, it should be banned until special laws concerning human cloning are enacted.