Banning Human Cloning: An Acceptable Limit on Scientific Inquiry or an Unconstitutional Restriction of Symbolic Speech
![handle is hein.journals/glj87 and id is 2419 raw text is: Banning Human Cloning: An Acceptable Limit on
Scientific Inquiry or an Unconstitutional
Restriction of Symbolic Speech?
MATTHEW B. Hsu*
INTRODUCTION
Our views of scientific advancement and discovery are marked by ambiva-
lence and mixed emotions. While society celebrates scientific accomplishment
and stands in awe of what science has allowed humanity to achieve, we are
equally fearful of science's dehumanizing and sometimes destructive power.
Therefore, when Scottish scientist Ian Wilmut, an embryologist at the Roslin
Institute in Edinburgh, announced on February 23, 1997, that he and his
research team had successfully cloned a mammal, the now-famous sheep named
Dolly,1 the reactions to this development should have come as no surprise.
While this accomplishment was hailed as a scientific breakthrough, it immedi-
ately raised the question of whether Dr. Wilmut's technique would be applied to
humans-prompting an intense debate over the ethical implications of human
cloning.2 Chicago physicist Richard Seed answered the question of who might
attempt to clone a human by announcing his intention to open a human cloning
clinic3 and to begin his practice by replicating himself.4 Before Dolly, cloning
humans was an if question. Now, the question is no longer if but when.5
Shortly after Dr. Wilmut's successful experiment, the government stepped in
to slow and perhaps halt the movement towards human cloning. First, President
Clinton announced a moratorium on federal funding for cloning research, citing
* J.D., Georgetown University Law Center, 2000; B.A., Swarthmore College, 1992. I thank Profes-
sor Steve Goldberg for his guidance and insight in developing this topic, and Professor Don Verrilli,
Jennifer Eller, and the editors of The Georgetown Law Journal for their critiques and suggestions.
Finally, I would like to thank my parents and my wife, Candice, for their support and confidence in
everything I do.
1. See Rick Weiss, Scottish Scientists Clone Adult Sheep: Technique's Use with Human is Feared,
WASH. POST, Feb. 24, 1997, at A 1.
2. The ethics of genetic research, and cloning specifically have been debated for many years.
However, Dr. Wilmut's success has moved the debate over cloning from the realm of theory into reality.
In fact, as soon as Dr. Wilmut announced his success, the media seized on the potential controversy
surrounding human cloning. See, e.g., id.
3. See All Things Considered (National Public Radio broadcast, Jan. 6, 1998), available in 1998 WL
7373959 [hereinafter All Things Considered]. Recently, a leading Italian embryologist, Severino
Antiori, announced that he too would attempt to clone a human being. See Steve Farrar, Maverick
Fertility Expert Plans First Human Clone, SuN. TIMES-LONDON, Oct. 25, 1998, at 1.
4. See Richard Saltus, Would-be Cloner Plans to Start with Himself, BOSTON GLOBE, Sept. 6, 1998,
at A6.
5. Just recently, researchers in South Korea announced that they successfully created a cloned
human embryo, which was genetically identical to an adult woman. See Rick Weiss, Researchers
Report Creating Cloned Human Embryo, WASH. POST, Dec. 17, 1998, at A3. If this report turns out to
be true, then the question is not whether human cloning will occur, but rather when it will occur in this
country.
2399](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.journals/glj87&div=66&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)
What Is HeinOnline?
Contact us for annual subscription options:
Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?
profiles profiles most
Banning Human Cloning: An Acceptable Limit on Scientific Inquiry or an Unconstitutional Restriction of Symbolic Speech
Contact us for annual subscription options:
Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?
profiles profiles most