(photos BF)
|
|
|
Joel Zimbelman, Religious Studies
(photos BF) |
As Joel Zimbelman, chair of Religious Studies and a member of the panel remarked, "We as human beings need to begin to think creatively about the issues involved—these issues are not going to go away." The forum created a lively platform for bringing the ethical debate on human cloning up to speed with the science involved.
Becky White, Philosophy professor of bioethics, introduced the three speakers: Jeff Bell, Biology, professor of Genetics and Evolution; Joel Zimbelman, Religious Studies, who has published over a dozen papers on bio-ethical issues; and Robert Stewart, Philosophy, who has also published many articles on bioethics.
White set the stage for the topic emphasizing the rapid chain of events, including the cloning of Dolly (the first mammal cloned from adult sheep cells), the Clinton administra-tion's ban on federal funds for research on human cloning, the National Bioethics Advisory Council's formation to identify moral and legal issues involved in cloning human tissue, and the call for a national debate, all of which has happened in the last twelve months.
The symposium started with Bell giving an overview of what cloning is and what science has been able to do so far. Bell explained scientific procedures in cloning, including Dolly's surprising story made possible by new techniques such as starving the cells before growing them in special cultures. Professor Bell informed the audience that much success has occurred with cloning fetal tissue with cows and sheep, but so far Dolly is the only success story in cloning adult mammal tissue and no one has cloned human cells yet.
 |
| Jeff Bell, Biological Sciences |
Bell pointed out that most of the actual benefits of cloning will be in the areas of agriculture where cloning could be used to bioengineer animals for higher yields, disease resistance, leaner meat, and production of therapeutic drugs directly in milk. The implications for preserving endangered species may be far- reaching.
Zimbelman outlined religious perspectives and arguments on the issue of human cloning. First, he clarified the generally shared perspective of most religions. Most mainstream religions take a restrained view on new advancements in science because of a shared perspective that the created world is good and human nature is to be appreciated with its limitations.
 |
| Robert Stewart, Philosophy |
Zimbelman posited the main religious arguments for and against human cloning, including notions such as humans shouldn't play god; sanctity of human life; cloning harms the cloned and society.
Robert Stewart spoke about the moral and ethical issues brought up by the possibility of human cloning. Citing arguments against cloning based on moral issues, Stewart asserted that most of these arguments have neither moral nor historical precedent. Cloning is upsetting to people, he suggested, because it crosses known boundaries and seems "unnatural."
Questions from the audience covered such topics as unpredictable changes in the gene pool, discrimination against clones, creating public curiosities through cloning, and public perception of genetically altered animals. Stewart summed up the general feeling of the room: "It's just not science fiction like it used to be science fiction!"
BF