  == Human Cloning ==  I think I have an answer for you.  Of course, it would be best if an actual conservative could tell you, but here's what I gather:  To the best of my understanding, conservatives object to therapeutic cloning (creation of replacement tissues, such as cloning just a liver or just a heart) because it uses up a whole embryo, which they believe would otherwise develop into a whole human being.  They object to reproductive cloning (the creation of a new organism, such as Dolly, a cloned racehorse, or a cloned baby) because of the risks.  Creating a human clone, even one that the parents intend to raise like any other child, would involve the loss of as many or more human embryos than the sheep embryos that it took to make Dolly.  In other words, I think that conservatives object to reproductive cloning for the same reason that they object to fertility clinics: they don't like how many embryos go down the drain.  So, hypothetically, if we could perfect the process to the point where the cells intended for organ growth never went through a totipotent stage or to the point where only one human embryo would be needed to create a baby, the conservatives would no longer object.  However, I haven't heard them lining up behind the use of PGA to create new human embryonic stem cell lines (This process doesn't destroy embryos; it just takes a little sample), so there are probably more layers to this issue than I can see on the surface.  