Argument: It is a false requirement that clones possess individuality
"The case for cloning humans". The Age. January 1, 2003 - "The identity of the clone is sometimes the issue. Shouldn't every human being be unique, be more than a copy of someone else, have a distinct personality and character?
It is by no means clear to me why such individual uniqueness should be demanded. Parents frequently take pleasure from the fact that their offspring are so like them, that they display family traits and characteristics, or that they are more like one side of the family than the other. Consider the members of the royal family and the interest taken in Prince Harry by a British newspaper that wants DNA tests performed. It questions whether Prince Charles is really his father - he seems so different.
Identical twins are naturally occurring clones. Not only do they look the same, they come from the same egg and sperm - they are genetically identical. No one suggests that twins are an abomination, or that the second twin is not an individual with the same rights.
On the contrary, the differences in personality, behaviour, competence and interests are commented on and studied. Despite the similarities, twins seem to develop differently and to have quite distinct personalities. This happens even though they are genetically identical and they grow up together - in the same time, the same place, with the same parents, and most of the same experiences.
The preference for individuality might actually be a prejudice on our part and not based on fact or consistent argument."