 What would the world be like if people stopped having children naturally and started producing clones of themselves?
Human Clones: Why Not? If you can clone a sheep, you can almost certainly clone a human being. 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. 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. And for a politician, making noise about cloning is pretty close to a fleshly temptation itself. Probably almost none, because Clinton has maintained Ronald Reagan's policy of minimizing federal grants for research in human reproduction. Besides, most researchers thought cloning humans was impossible--so, for the moment, there's unlikely to be a grant-request backlog. He also openly claims the authority to decide how people reproduce. If humans have a right to reproduce, what right does society have to limit the means? Essentially all reproduction is done these days with medical help--at delivery, and often before. Truly natural human reproduction would mean 50 percent infant mortality and make pregnancy-related death the No. 1 killer of adult women. With in vitro fertilization, the sperm and egg are combined in the lab and surgically implanted in the womb. Less than two decades ago, a similar concern was raised over the ethical issues involved in "test-tube babies."
 The same as now.
 More dangerous than now  Less individualistic  The same as now.  More unique