Which is NOT an argument against human reproductive cloning?

• A. Cloning is unnatural.
• B. It violates the right of the resulting clone to a unique identity or future.
• C. It will result in the demeaning artificial manufacture of children as products.
• D. It would guarantee improved health outcomes for society.

Answer: (D)

This item tests how we separate objections to cloning from claims about potential benefits. The first three statements express common worries about moral status and social impact: cloning being unnatural reflects a discomfort with altering natural processes; concerns about a clone’s unique identity and future touch on personhood and autonomy; and viewing children as product-like creations points to dignity and commodification issues. The fourth statement, however, speaks to a possible benefit—improved health outcomes for society. That would be an argument in favor of cloning, not against it. Even if such benefits are contested, it’s still a positive consequence rather than an objection, so it’s the statement that does not serve as an argument against cloning.