A LIKELY STORY: BEST TO REFUSE TO FOLLOW A SHEEP NAMED DOLLY

Cloning seems to be another scientific "breakthrough" with a troubling potential.

"You and I were created by God uniquely and everyone of us is -- and God intended it this way -- an unrepeatable life. I'm not at all convinced that we're not stepping over the line if we're going to duplicate ourselves just because we think we're such wonderful people."

-- Wayne Perkins, professor of philosophy and religion, University of Evansville, Evansville, Ind.

Seemingly straight from some surreal 1950s pulp horror magazine or an especially creepy episode of "The Twilight Zone" comes the much ballyhooed controversy of cloning human beings.

And while I refuse to get knee-deep in the hoopla, I can't help but consider the possibilities.

Since scientist Ian Wilmut succeeded in cloning Dolly the sheep several weeks back, it seems more and more certain that human cloning will be possible some day.

Cloning experts and neophytes alike suddenly have become philosophical about what it could mean to duplicate people.

Some people jest about it:

"There could be enough Elle Macphersons for everybody," one friend quipped.

"We could clone Eisenhower to run against Gore in the next election," another gibed.

And even I have to admit that the idea of cloning a couple more Michael Jordans to disperse the talent among other NBA teams might make the playoffs a bit more interesting.

Some people take it much more seriously. It has been called "an affront to human dignity," and others say that it isn't any different from having a baby the old fashioned way.

People have all sorts of ideas about how cloning human beings could be beneficial, from cloning to provide organs for ill people to the caustic notion of cloning a master race or a slave class.

Opponents say cloning is simply "playing God" and that is a dangerous path. They say that it's an abomination and should not be tolerated or accepted.

I tend to agree with the opponents.

Wilmut agrees, too. "Similar experiments with humans would be totally unacceptable," he has said.

At least for the foreseeable future, there are scientific and medical uncertainties about the health of the fetus, and that makes it unethical to try it.

But more importantly, I am troubled by the idea of cloning for the purpose of cultivating medical parts, or by parents cloning to create a mirror image of themselves.

And I think the idea of creating a slave class is insulting.

Most importantly, I think it would be an invasion into human parenthood. It would take away much of the joy of life and add a synthetic, inhuman, unreal flavor to what was meant to be the most humane event of all.

And if that argument doesn't work, just think of Frankenstein.

Scott Moyers is a staff writer for the Southeast Missourian.