In Thursday's Collegian, there were three letters to the editor regarding human cloning and why it should not be banned.

I must address one major issue that seemed to be excluded, however, which has to do with when human life begins. One of the articles stated that no one knows for sure when life begins, so until it can be proven that an embryo is human life, cloning should be allowed to take place.

This argument, however, is completely invalid. Some of the world's most prominent scientists and physicians testified to a U.S. Senate judiciary committee that human life begins at conception, thus making an embryo a human life. In the same series of testimonies, not a single expert witness could testify that life began at any point other than conception or implantation, and only one expert stated that it could not be determined when life begins. This raises another issue.

If it were in fact unknown as to when life begins, why would the benefit of the doubt lean toward the destruction of the embryo, rather than the preservation of life?

If a hunter is uncertain whether a movement in the nearby brush is caused by a person, does his uncertainty lead him to fire?

The very idea of cloning humans is wrong, and human cloning research, as President Bush has stated, is creating life to destroy it. Therefore, it should not be allowed here in America, a country where the right to life needs to be observed once again.