Cloning humans - for and against

While there are strong emotional reactions to cloning human beings there are also good arguments to be made both for and against and these should be use dot inform our emotion reaction.

For:

Would be used to counter infertility and or genetic disease. (Robertson JA¹)
It is little different from the birth of identical twins. (Robertson JA¹)
What is important is how a child is treated after birth. (Robertson JA¹)
Preferable to donor eggs and/or sperm for the infertile.
It meets the deep human need to reproduce somehow.
as of May 2001, it may be that the survival rate of embryos (even in IVF) will rise to 75% (Beebe & Wheeler³)
a source of genetically identical body parts for transplant treatment of injured individuals. (this is an argument for therapy not cloning)

Against

Cloning would devalue children and treat them as commodities. (Annas GJ¹)
It would radically alter what it means to be human - we would lose something vital to the uniqueness of humanity. (Annas GJ¹)
It is genetic reductionism. (Annas GJ¹)
Fixes the genome and creates genetic throw backs.
Creates family relationship confusion and creates inheritance issues. (Wachbroit R²)
Cloning could be used to replace family members who have died in accidents.
the argument that cloning only has a 1% survival rate of cloned eggs (P Moore ⁴)
Impact upon the child produced of its origins.
uncertain genetic consequences. (Many of the animal clones so far produced have genetic and consequent clinical problems)

Robertson JA & Annas GJ, Human Cloning, New England Journal of Medicine 339, 1998, pp119-22
Robert Wachbroit: Genetic Encores: The Ethics of Human Cloning, Maryland School of Public Affairs, 1997.
Reported in New Scientist; David Beebe & Matthew Wheeler, embryologists at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign have produced a new IVF egg maturing device.
P Moore, Babel's Shadow, pg 119, (quoting Teruhiko Wakayama and Ryuzo Yanagimachi published in Nature Genetics 22 1999 pp 127-28)