Birth Control


The Food and Drug Administration seems to be taking the position that cloning a person, if done in the United States, would amount to unauthorized experimentation on humans. I'm not sure who the experimental subject is in this case–the donor (who, if the Raelian claim turns out to be true, has given consent) or the baby. But if the FDA is right, why does Congress want to ban something that's already illegal?


Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Are you kidding? Congress already spends an enormous amount of time making illegal things even “more” illegal, or at least continually increasing the penalties for them.

    It’s hard to tell when they lost touch with common sense. They all need to take a lesson from the late Sonny Bono, who said, when asked what he thought about illegal immigration, “What’s to think? It’s illegal.”

  2. “It’s hard to tell when they lost touch with common sense.”

    Paul, they never had it to begin with nor did the clods who put them in office in the first place. What the politicians do know is what the public fears and what illusionary protection they could propose to get and keep their votes.

  3. Hmmm. Passing laws to forbid something that is already illegal. Sort of sounds like gun control, doesn’t it?

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.