Science is a powerful force capable of changing the world; therefore, it cannot develop without control. The fundamental limitation to making copies of people is the impossibility of replicating consciousness. At the same time, reproduction can be counted among human beings’ natural inclinations, which means it is reasonable to procreate by any means. It is the argument made by scientists and philosophers who advocate cloning experiments. Technology may add an element of artificiality to reproduction, but this should not be a cause for concern. At the same time, from a philosophical point of view, people should be subject to moral laws without exception. Man can be genuinely free or autonomous only in the realm of reason; therefore, it is necessary to act rationally. An argument against cloning can be built on this principle as follows. If a person decides to procreate by cloning, one must recognize all potential consequences for the future and that everyone else can do the same. However, if cloning becomes the only form of human reproduction, the gene pool will begin to dwindle, and this cannot be permitted to happen.
Although the general public opposes reproductive cloning, some argue that its use by different couples would be ethically justified. For example, lesbian or gay couples may want to use cloning to have genetically related children. Modifications could give such children the characteristics of both couple members. Thus, cloning combined with a mutation may be attractive to infertile, lesbian, or same-sex couples looking for children with the characteristics of both. It is an encouraging and ethical method because sexual orientation should not be a barrier to creating a family. However, it is essential to remember that reproductive interventions must first and foremost be safe and until the process is thoroughly controlled, it should not be accomplished.