Human cloning for reproductive purposes is a highly controversial and widely misunderstood issue that must be carefully examined and decided upon. The media has promoted ignorant responses to this issue by bluntly attacking the possibility of using cloning and paying little attention to its context and therapeutic nature. Human cloning for reproductive purposes is a therapy for infertility aimed at giving individuals who have unsuccessfully exhausted all existing methods of reproduction another chance to procreate. According to the President's Council on Bioethics, critics have unfortunately given a science-fiction, mystical connotation to human cloning that implies that armies of xeroxed Hitlers and unnatural, subhuman clones will inevitably result (President's Council on Bioethics par. 7-9). However, any individual created using this method is legally and ethically a human being that can feel, think and live the same as any other. It would have been a tragedy if America had listened to the critics' negative opinions of in vitro fertilization. The book Human Cloning and Human Dignity states, "myriad claims have been made that human cloning carries the possibility of devastating social and individual effects; however, such claims are hasty and hardly well supported. Because this issue is so complex, the context and legal implications of cloning for reproductive purposes must be considered" (Kass 44).
             Past legal cases, such as Roe Vs Wade, have already determined that decisions about how to procreate is one of the individual's most basic rights. Upon deciding whether or not an act is legal, two questions must be answered: does the act constitute one of an individual's natural rights and does the act violate any other individual's constituted rights? If the act constitutes both a natural right and fails to violate any natural right, then it is not illegal and should not be prohibited...