 What is the main reason the writer takes issue with the Pope's stance on cloning?
Human Clones: Why Not? If you can clone a sheep, you can almost certainly clone a human being. Some of the most powerful people in the world have felt compelled to act against this threat. President Clinton swiftly imposed a ban on federal funding for human-cloning research. Bills are in the works in both houses of Congress to outlaw human cloning--a step urged on all governments by the pope himself. Cloning humans is taken to be either 1) a fundamentally evil thing that must be stopped or, at the very least, 2) a complex ethical issue that needs legislation and regulation. But what, exactly, is so bad about it? Start by asking whether human beings have a right to reproduce. I say "yes." I have no moral right to tell other people they shouldn't be able to have children, and I don't see that Bill Clinton has that right either. When Clinton says, "Let us resist the temptation to copy ourselves," it comes from a man not known for resisting other temptations of the flesh. And for a politician, making noise about cloning is pretty close to a fleshly temptation itself.
 When he supports the ban, he goes beyond his position as a religious leader for a specific group of people.
 His opinion on it carries too much weight on how the ban is handled.  When he supports the ban, he goes beyond his position as a religious leader for a specific group of people.  The writer feels that humans have the right to choose how they reproduce, and the Pope is disallowing that.  The Bible says nothing about cloning in it.