Because cloning entails recreating an existing person’s genetic code, some argue that cloning would, necessarily, entail a violation of the cloned child’s right to a distinctive genetic identity. According to this objection, our DNA is what endows each human being with uniqueness and dignity. Because cloning recreates a pre-existing DNA sequence, the cloned child would be denied that uniqueness and, therefore, his/ her dignity would be compromised. This objection appears to be an incarnation of the objection from the Right to an Open Future. Certainly the concerns are similar: that a cloned child would be deprived of his/ her own individual identity because of his/ her genetic origins. However, whereas in the objection from the Right to an Open Future, the cloned child is deprived of individuality based on the perception of others - this does not seem to really be an objection to the practice of cloning simpliciter - this objection indicates that there is something inherently individuality-compromising, and therefore dignity-compromising, in recreating an existing genetic code. If this objection is successful, if recreating a pre-existing genetic code is intrinsically morally objectionable, then it would seem to present an objection to the actual cloning process.
The author is likely to agree with which of the following?