Is there a consensus on the morality of cloning, human or otherwise? This hotly debated question raises many eyebrows when this sensitive subject is brought up. Through the mess of scientific support and religious opposition, as well as moral and ethical dilemmas, one thing remains the same; cloning is not yet safe enough to use on humans. Although, when it is, the benefits that result will greatly outweigh the risks and provide so much potential for the betterment of life. With proper legislation to control it, cloning on all levels, once it becomes safe and effective, should be allowed in the United States.
             No one knew much about the scientific world of cloning until 1997, when Scottish scientists cloned the first animal, a sheep named Dolly. Cloning basically means the copying of genetic material in one of two ways; blastomere separation or somatic cell nuclear transfer. With blastomere separation, the embryo is split soon after fertilization, and the resulting organisms are identical twins. This type of cloning can happen naturally or scientifically, resulting in multiple births. On the other hand, somatic cell nuclear transfer can only happen in a lab. In this process, scientists empty the nucleus of an adult egg cell, and transfer genetic material into it
             (CellNEWS). Dolly, along with other sheep, goats, mice and cows, have been cloned using this process. This showed that contrary to scientific belief, specialized adult
             animal cells do in fact revert back to a non-specialized, embryonic state; restoring the ability to produce any type of cell. It was previously thought that once a cell became a liver cell, or a heart cell the change was irreversible, and the unnecessary genes were deactivated (CellNEWS).
             Although cloning has been a major scientific advance, it has not been without its drawbacks. Failure has claimed about 98% of cloning efforts, the embryos either die during the gestational period or sh...