Again, I have to keep bringing this up because you don’t seem to understand it. There are no uterine replicators. They don’t exist. To even say that we are “moving in that direction” is untrue. There has never been even an unsuccesful attempt at in-vitro gestation of a mammal. It has not happened. It is not happening. We have no idea about how to make it happen. There isn’t even any ongoing research on the subject. Get it? There is no such thing. There will not be such a thing. And even if there were, the vast vast majority of children gestated in-vitro will be sexually created children, although perhaps created via in-vitro fertillization.
Yes, cloning “as a perferred choice” for reproduction might cause some problems. But why do you think that cloning would become a preferred choice? Look, if asexuality and childlessness became a preferred choice, then the human race would go extinct. If polygamy and 25 kids became a preferred choice, we’d have massive overpopulation. But I don’t believe that either choice will become preferred. Why would cloning become a preferred choice? Yes, if we assume that human society will make insane, inexplicable decisions in the future, then anything is possible. But I believe that people will tend to make comprehensible decisions.
But even if many people decided to have cloned children, what would that mean? Yes, cloning decreases diversity. But so does having fewer children. If I clone myself, I haven’t decreased the diversity of the human genome any more that if I never had kids at all. In fact, I’ve decreased it LESS, since my genes will still be present in my cloned child. If I never have kids, then any unique genes that I possess will be lost forever. If we ban cloning on genetic diversity grounds, we would logically also have to ban not having children.
You ask if we already have laws layed out for the parentage of clones. No, of course we don’t. Such laws are not present because the vast majority of people don’t understand cloning and don’t favor reproductive cloning. Since people don’t support creating cloned children at all, of course there hasn’t developed case law explicitly about the parentage of cloned children. But my point is that explict laws are unneccesary. Even without such laws, we still have courts. If the parentage of a cloned child is disputed, a judge will simply rule based on the best interests of the child. The cloned child will never be judged a slave, because in this country involutary servitude is prohibited by the 13th amendment.
Now, on to some other points. What if a married couple is separated? And what if the woman has a child by another man? Well, the children will STILL be considered to be legally the children of her husband, unless either the husband, or the woman, or the genetic father take steps. The point is that the genetic background of the child is only taken into account when the parentage of the child is disputed.
Who is going to dispute the parentage of a cloned child, and why? If a couple goes to a fertillity clinic and asks for a clone of one of them to be created, and when the baby is born they put both their names on the birth certificate, what interest does anyone have in disputing that? Remember, that our courts are already able to adjuticate custody of children. Genetic relationships are taken into account, but they are not the last word. The last word is the best interest of the child.
Another issue. The harvesting of organs from clones. First of all, this is a problem that would go away if we can grow whole organs. Growing headless clones in order to harvest their organs strikes me as incredibly wasteful and costly. A headless clone would be the equivalent of a patient on permanent intensive care. How much are people going to be willing to spend for this? Do you have any idea how expensive intenisve care treatment is? And exactly how many doctors are you going to find who would be willing to care for such a patient?
Now, about the selling of organs.
http://www.tribuneindia.com/2002/20020928/main9.htm
Here is an article from India, about the organ trade. It states that the person who sold their kidney got 30,000 rupees. At 2002.12.03 23:47:51 GMT, 1 INR went for 0.0207290 USD. 30,000.00 India Rupees = 621.869 United States Dollars. Less than $1,000.
The idea that people will pay any price for black market organs is false, simply because most people don’t have thousands of dollars to squander on risky medical procedures. If an insurance company won’t pay for the transplant, it doesn’t happen. Now, how many insurance companies are going to pay for murdering a child in order to harvest their organs? And why aren’t the rich creating children the normal way, testing them for compatibility, then murdering them if they are a tissue match? Your child is very likely going to be a good candidate for organ compatibility. Why doesn’t Bill Gates murder his children and harvest their organs?
Yes, I have met clones, as I’ve stated before. I grew up with clones in my family. My younger sisters are clones. Cloning sometimes occurs naturally, and my sisters are the result of natural cloning.