If Embryonic Stem Cells are okay, why isn't Cloning?

Maybe I have read too much science fiction, but President Obama's latest order on stem cells seems self-contradictory to me. On the one hand, he endorses the use of embryonic stem cells - a moral issue for those who believe embryos are "human life" where embryos may be created and destroyed to harvest stem cells. On the other hand he condemns the use of stem cells for human cloning.

Obama also said the stem cell policy is designed so that it "never opens the door to the use of cloning for human reproduction." Such cloning, he said, "is dangerous, profoundly wrong, and has no place in our society or any society."

The statement that cloning is "profoundly wrong" is made without any defense or philosophical rationale. He simply assumes it is obvious. But it is not. If you are not worried about "human life" in embryos, how is cloning different from producing twins from current fertility techniques? (*cough* octo-mom *cough*) Can anyone out there explain this to me logically?

Or is it just that to Barack Obama stem cell research "feels right" and cloning "feels wrong"?

Removing the Moral Dilemma to Stem Cells

When George W. Bush announced a freeze on Federal support for Stem Cell research in 2000, he was roundly condemned by the medical establishment who accused him of "wanting Alzheimer's patients to suffer." But at the time, Pro-life advocates were already pointing to sources of stem cells which did not require the death of an embryo - fetal cord blood, for example. Now, scientists have announced they have found a way to produce stem cells without embryo death from any patient! A mere 8 years - when added to a little political pressure - was enough to completely free the way for future stem cell experimentation.

In a breakthrough that could have huge implications, British and Canadian scientists have found a way of reprogramming skin cells taken from adults, effectively winding the clock back on the cells until they were in an embryonic form...

Because the cells can be made from a patient's own skin, they carry the same DNA and so could be used without a risk of being rejected by the immune system.

So, not only is it a morally-defensible solution for Pro-Lifers, it is actually a better solution medically because it uses the patient's own cells and obviates the need for anti-rejection drugs (which suppress the immune system in general). In my ever-so-humble opinion, this justifies GWB's decision from 8 years back.

Non-Embryonic Stem Cells Fix Flaws From Breast Cancer

I found this story to be really exciting. Japanese doctors have started testing using a woman's fat to pull out stem cells to repair damage caused by breast cancer. After 8 months, there was an 80% patient satisfaction rate. All of this done without needing one aborted baby!