« Scopes Monkey Trial Biology Text Listed Values | Main | Why There is No Escaping the Blog »

The Morality of Human Cloning for Stem Cell Research

According to the Associated Press, the creators of Dolly the sheep, the world's first mammal cloned from an adult, want to create cloned human embryos for stem cell research.

For those who read this blog it should come as no surprise that I oppose the cloning of humans for stem cell harvesting because it involves the destruction of human life, a practice I believe is immoral.

Interestingly, Ian Wilmut, who led the team which "created" Dolly, was quoted in the AP article as asserting it would be "immoral" not to use therapeutic cloning for stem cell research. "Now I think we would all agree that humans at any stage of their life deserve respect," Wilmut said. "But ... because at this early stage the embryo does not have that key human characteristic of being aware, to me it would be immoral not to take this opportunity to study diseases."

Considerable discussion could go into what it means to be "aware" and how one would go about determining when someone else has the characteristic of "awareness". I'll leave this for another time.

What Wilmut has revealed is that his scientific pursuits are both justified and motivated by a faith-based belief system. On the basis of his beliefs (i.e., "to me"), he derives the moral imperative that cloning is good, right and necessary. His beliefs tell him that embryos are humans that deserve respect but that the greater good is served by sacrificing them to pursue potentially beneficial therapeutic treatments for chronic diseases, such as Parkinson's and Diabetes. His beliefs lead him to conclude that some measure of self-awareness is necessary for a human to be valued by society.

Wilmut's implied condemnation of those who oppose cloning humans for stem cell research is rooted in his faith (his unprovable beliefs), not his science.

Wilmut and I, and all individuals for that matter, ultimately have faith in something or someone. Our beliefs lead us to conclude what is moral and immoral and form the basis for our ultimate objectives and goals. Everything we do and the decisions we make, whether in church, school, business or pleasure, follow from what we ultimately believe.

Faith in God leads me to believe that humans are created equal and deserve respect and protection on the basis of the value that God places in them and not because they are self-aware.

As you consider the morality of cloning for stem cell research consider the underlying presuppositions of the various positions. Christians are often blantant about the connection between their beliefs and their morals leading critics to label them as "religions nuts" without considering the merits of their position. Conversely, the beliefs of scientists and entrepreneurs are often masked by their pragmatic vision of the future, marketing expectations and technical presentation. However, the true debate begins with foundational beliefs and presuppositions - it begins with religion - upon which ethics and morals can be derived.

Posted by tim at December 28, 2004 12:05 AM

Articles Related to Stem Cells:

Adult stem cells and Spinal Cord Injuries - May 19, 2007
Adult Stem Cell Research to Benefit Diabetics - Mar 28, 2007
Adult Stem Cells Treat Heart Disease - Mar 27, 2007
Adult Stem Cells Treat Autoimmune Disease - Oct 04, 2006
U.S. Senate says Yes to ESC Research - Jul 18, 2006
Stem Cells, Questions and Language - Feb 17, 2006
Adult Stem Cells that Can Regenerate - Jan 06, 2006
Faking the Data and Human Cloning - Dec 21, 2005
Hypocrisy Over Stem Cells - Dec 15, 2005
Senate Passes Cord Blood Donation Bill - Sep 28, 2005

Comments

I'm not sure how "to me" indicates a religious perspective. It definitely indicates that Wilmut is giving his own view. It may be a result of some kind of moral relativism, but more likely he's just admitting that different people have different views and trying to state what he believes as objectively true without offending someone who believes something different about what's objectively true. This does involve different presuppositions, but it doesn't necessarily involve religious ones.

Posted by: Jeremy Pierce at January 1, 2005 11:26 AM

I used "to me" to indicate a belief as opposed to a scientific conclusion formed on the basis of observation in my statement, "On the basis of his beliefs (i.e., "to me") ... ". My point is that the motivation, even by scientists, for cloning to provide embryonic stem cells is based upon their beliefs. Later, I went a step further and implied the system of beliefs and presuppositions of an individual constitute his or her religion. Perhaps it is this latter reasoning you take issue with? Anyway, thanks for the probing comment.

Posted by: Tim at January 1, 2005 11:52 AM