Randolfe Wicker, December 9, 1999
Half of all fertility clinics have staff
members skilled enough to perform somatic cell nuclear transfer.
Physicians protecting reproductive
medicine are equally divided between the sexes.
The first child conceived though cloning
will most likely be a latter born twin of a female fertility doctor.
Females are easier to clone than males.
The right of a surrogate mother to the
children she bears, as defined by state law, ranges from having
unquestioned authority to keep that child, to limited parental authority,
to no parental claim whatsoever.
The first child born, conceived though
cloning, will almost certainly be borne by an unknowing surrogate mother.* Should any complications arise, the surrogate mother-to-be
would simply be told: “This pregnancy has to be terminated.”
Fertility clinics will assure everyone
that “protocols” will be established to monitor any human cloning.
The FDA is already preparing such
guidelines regulating this medical procedure. It has no authority
whatsoever in this area. Such guidelines will not withstand a legal
For the “Chris Columbus” of human
cloning to wait for “approval” by either a fertility clinic or the FDA
would be equivalent to the original Christopher Columbus awaiting funding
from “The Flat Earth Society” for his voyage to the New World.
Like “Dolly” her birth announcement
will be delayed. Not
necessarily for scientific publications but simply as a precautionary
procedure to verify the child is completely normal and healthy.
The originator and child will instantly
become the two most famous people in the world.
Millions of dollars will accompany this fame.
Movies will be made. Books and documentaries will follow.
Like the Dionne quintuplets of the 20th Century, this
fame and fortune may prove both a burden and a blessing.
Remember, you heard this first from
Randolfe Wicker, founder Clone Rights United Front at,
member Board of Directors, The Human Cloning Foundation at www.humancloning.org.
unborn children; I wish them Godspeed and good health.
them lead the way. I’ll
just be one of many that follow in their safe and proven footsteps.
*Lori Andrews, The Clone Age “Adventures in the New World of
Reproductive Technology”, Chapter 7, “Wombs for Rent”, pages
103-123. Henry Holt, Publisher
**Mark D. Eibert, Esq., Reason Magazine, “Clone Wars – The
forces of government gather in fear of hypothetical clones. (Excerpt
below; to see full text of article http://www.reason.com/9806/col.eibert.html)
In January, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration
announced that it planned to "regulate" (that is, prohibit)
human cloning. In the past, the FDA has largely ignored the fertility
industry, making no effort to regulate in vitro fertilization, methods for
injecting sperm into eggs, and other advanced reproductive technologies
that have much in common with cloning techniques.
An FDA spokesperson told me that although Congress
never expressly granted the agency jurisdiction over cloning, the FDA can
regulate it under its statutory authority over biological products (like
vaccines or blood used in transfusions) and drugs. But even Rep. Vernon
Ehlers (R-Mich.), one of the most outspoken congressional opponents of
cloning, admits that "it's hard to argue that a cloning procedure is
a drug." Of course, even if Congress had granted the FDA explicit
authority to regulate cloning, such authority would only be valid if
Congress had the constitutional power to regulate reproduction--which is
itself a highly questionable assumption (more on that later).
Nor have state legislatures been standing still.
Effective January 1, California became the first state to outlaw human
cloning. California's law defines "cloning" so broadly and
inaccurately--as creating children by the transfer of nuclei from any type
of cell to enucleated eggs--that it also bans a promising new infertility
treatment that has nothing to do with cloning. In that new procedure,
doctors transfer nuclei from older, dysfunctional eggs (not differentiated
adult cells as in cloning) to young, healthy donor eggs, and then
inseminate the eggs with the husband's sperm--thus conceiving an ordinary
child bearing the genes of both parents. Taking California as their
bellwether, many other states are poised to follow in passing very
In addition to the above reference, Mark Eibert’s legal arguments
are developed in much greater detail in the current issues U & I
Magazine (See below).
Mark D. Eibert, Esq., “Human Cloning: Myths, Medical Benefits and
Constitutional Rights.” This article is
adapted from a speech and multimedia presentation on cloning given by Mark
D. Eibert, Esq., at the annual joint meeting of the San Bernardino County
Medical Society, the Riverside County Medical Society, and the San
Bernardino County Bar Association, on September 23, 1999.
It is being reprinted by the permission of the author, who retains
all rights in it.
So, today, October 10th and
11th, we have a religious group announcing that they have $500,000.00
donated to clone a female child who died at the age of ten month.
In Montreal, Canada, the Raelians had a press conference to show to
the world that they had 50 willing surrogate mothers for the first
child conceived through cloning.
The Washington Post mused on the idea that a "religious
cult" with many willing egg donors and many willing surrogate
mothers was "technically positioned" to achieve what the
mundane fertility industry has stridently denied any interest in
doing- cloning a human being.
So, here we are, the most important movement in the world today with
so much "input" to give but with no takers because their
30-second sound bite mentality makes them "time slaves" to a
religious cult that has hijacked the "real" human cloning
It all just fills me with disgust. Why has this come to be? Why isn't
sane rational discussion of this issue even given its day in court?
I foresee the covers of Newsweek, Time, even the Economist, with
pictures of the "new prophet" Rael holding the first child
conceived through cloning in his arms.
Rael is to enter a race car contest, today, in Montreal (unless I am
mistaken). I "put my life at risk" having a volunteer
Raelian (Masseuse by profession) woman drive me to UFO Land.
While the tires screamed on the entrance ramp and my blood pressure
soared (contemplating eternity) on the way to UFO Land, I was
"assured" by my driver and friend in the backseat that
"Rael is very comfortable at 150 miles per hour".
Now, if Rael happened to "crash" today/tomorrow, I would
suddenly find myself a supporter of their efforts to clone him.
Otherwise, I really don't believe that they deserve to be in the
"driver's seat" of this movement.
Randolfe H. Wicker