The Creation Lottery: Final Lessons from Natural Reproduction: Why
Those Who Accept Natural Reproduction Should Accept Cloning and Other
Frankenstein Reproductive Technologies
a1 Julian Savulescu, Ph.D., is Uehiro Professor of
Applied Ethics at the University of Oxford, England,
Director of the Oxford Center for Applied Ethics, and Editor of the
a2 John Harris, D.Phil., is Sir David Alliance Professor
of Bioethics, Institute of Medicine, Law, and Bioethics, School of Law,
University of Manchester, United Kingdom
Opponents of destructive embryo research, such as embryo rightists,
as well as proponents accept that natural reproduction is permissible.
There is an alternative to natural reproduction—to remain
childless. John Harris began this series of articles by asking, what
does a commitment to the permissibility of natural reproduction entail?
Harris has argued that a commitment to the permissibility of natural
reproduction entails a commitment to the permissibility of destructive
embryo research. Julian Savulescu has denied this. However, there are
significant areas in which our views have converged.