Governmental Banning on human and organ cloning is posing a problem on those educated ones in academia. Researcher and scientist Dr. Ian Wilmut has successfully cloned a sheep, and has gathered from this experiment evidence that strongly proves that human and organ cloning could be performed - safely and effectively. Unfortunately, our government has almost immediately banned such cloning in this country. Did they realize the benefits of such a discovery? Perhaps they simply believe that it is some sort of unethical, immoral experiment that is not beneficial to our society. Perhaps they should take a closer look at exactly what these researchers have derived from years of experimenting. In this paper, I will propose a possible plan to persuade our government to take another look at human and organ cloning. Many positive benefits could come out of this, and it is our responsibility, for the sake of a healthier future, to push policy makers to change their minds and loosen their grips on such a banning.

Cloning of various organisms has been going on for years. This concept of cloning was conceived in 1938, but it was not until 1994 that a method using a

An important issue that could be resolved is infertility. Infertile couples could have children with human cloning. On Saturday, October 17, 1996, the Board of Directors of RESOLVE of Northern California adopted a resolution and policy statement saying that cloning may offer infertile individuals a legitimate way of forming families, that they support research to make human cloning safe and effective, and that they oppose governmental efforts to deny infertility patients the option to use cloning technology to have children (HCF). Many infertility patients have tested with various forms of treatment, some which are not exactly the safest, and many have proved unsuccessful. This cloning method is safe and with more research, has the potential of high success rates. This is factual information based on research. With so much support for human cloning, how did the policy makers decide against it?

"Human Cloning Foundation." 2 February 1998

Step by step the technology to clone people is advancing. Of course, the procedures and applications have not been perfected, but many clinics in the U.S. already have the equipment to start cloning. Many fear that these institutions may try to do something before the levels of risk are reduced to an acceptable standard. President Clinton only put a ban on such experimentation for five years, which means that thereafter the ban will be expired and human cloning may have another chance at production (Business Week). But why did they decide upon this in the first place? Scientists need to research human cloning for the future. In five years, when they are ready to prove to the world that they are finally ready and advanced enough to start cloning humans, due to the lack of decent government funding, they will be unable to provide accurate data. Once again, senate will reject the idea, and such projects will be further delayed. So what is the answer to this bizarre cycle? The government must fund research and experimentation to allow scientists to clone humans. They need to take anothe

Some common words found in the essay are:
Business Week, Carlos Ortiz, Northern California, Ian Wilmut, human cloning, President Clinton, Governmental Banning, Human Cloning, Cloning Foundation, organ cloning, human organ, human organ cloning, business week, policy makers, human race, identical twins, cloning government, Greenhaven Press, governmental banning human, research human, government society, human cloning government, research human cloning,
Approximate Word count = 1384
Approximate Pages = 6 (250 words per page double spaced)