cloning, a majority of the Council recommended a temporary moratorium as the proper approach, because it would “reaffirm the principle that science can progress while upholding the community’s moral norms, and would therefore reaffirm the community’s moral support for science and biomedical technology.” 102
The most restrictive approach to cloning, a permanent ban, was proposed by the Council minority and majority, and Nancy Reagan as appropriate for reproductive cloning. “By permanently banning cloning-to-produce children, this policy gives force to the strong ethical verdict against [it], unanimous in the Council ... and widely supported by the American people.”103 This approach is also favored by the USCCB not only for reproductive cloning, but also for therapeutic cloning.
One related issue, that of the use of federal funding for therapeutic cloning, has also been discussed. No proposals have been made by any of the groups or individuals listed above for the use of federal funding for reproductive cloning. Opponents of funding therapeutic cloning, such as the Council majority, have expressed concern that use of federal funding for therapeutic cloning would put “the federal government in the novel and unsavory position of mandating the destruction of nascent human life.”104 Proponents of federal funding for therapeutic cloning, such as the Council minority, NBAC, Nancy Reagan, Gerald Ford, and the Nobel Laureates, cite as support the advancements that might be powered by the infusion of federal dollars into the research, as well as the ethical protections that would attach with the money.
President’s Council, Human Cloning, p. xxxvii. President’s Council, Human Cloning, p. xxxiv. President’s Council, Human Cloning, p. xxxvi