I think the concept of cloning is abhorrent when applied to human beings. Deliberately making multiple copies of the same individual, presumaby because it has characteristics which are of some value, would only make sense if those humans were destined for a particular function or purpose, probably a commercial one. Why else would you need identical copies of a person unless you planned to use them as property, like livestock or farm produce, or standardized industrial workers.

In other words, it guarantees humans cannot be grown for their organs, or because they will make good miners or astronauts or athletes, or as some other form of property.

As for the stem cell controversy, the opponents fought it for symbolic reasons which arose from their religious objections to the process. They knew those cell cultures were going to be flushed down some lab drain eventually. The ban was also overturned for symbolic reasons, to deny those who sought to impose their religious views on others through public policy.

I have a potentially deadly medical condition which may be treatable through stem cells, and although I realize the odds are small a cure will be found in my lifetime, what right do these troglodytes have to impose their voodoo religion on me.