The Stem Cell Debate – Slippery Slope or Responsible Hope?

Let me be up front with my readers about the fact that I am still markedly undecided about the use of human embryo or clone derived stem cells. As a scientist, I am piqued at the possibility of any substantial key discovered in the fight against the diseases and bodily disintegrations that plague mankind today. I am awed by the awesome intricacies of the human design and the powerful mind-power we have to investigate and comprehend it in laboratories around the world. I am frightened by the prospect that someone will abuse the capabilities uncovered by science resulting in harm to mankind physically, socially, psychologically, emotionally, culturally, morally, and spiritually. I am equally cognizant of the fact that when you give man an inch, he then blasts off into space before you even discover that he’s no longer on the planet.

They say “there are two sides to every story” but I have found that this debate has many sides. The following are a potpourri of viewpoints that I encounter on a daily basis and that may or may not represent your thoughts on this debate. There are those who would say “let’s throw off the gauntlet of morality for it is nothing more than opinion and run full-force into the yet undiscovered potential of scientific discovery.” Cloning in all its’ majesty should be allowed, even for the creation of “spare part.” Maybe it’s o.k. to clone animals, bacteria and corn but not people. Some would argue that morality is best decided but that which results in the greater good. Many have decided for themselves that since embryos created for In Vitro Fertilization (IVF) are just going to be discarded, then we should not waste the but use them for the betterment of mankind through research. Maybe the creation of an embryo for both IVF and for stem cell research is morally wrong but since it’s going to be done anyway, then we should have proper safeguards in place to prevent abuse. There are some who insist that it’s o.k. to create embryos for IVF but not for destruction for research purposes. Many in the world believe that life begins at conception, that all life is sacred and that it should be protected and not used for research. A lot of people I talk to would like to see some alternatives to the destruction of an embryo in order to avoid the current passionate debate. Many newer techniques for Stem Cell “acquisition” have been developed recently which is beginning to “address” this issue by working around it. There are a lot of undecided individuals floating and bouncing somewhere in-between each of the aforementioned. Have you found where you fall amongst these choices? Have you thought long and hard about it researching the facts or merely repeating media by-lines? What is there to gain? Where would a slippery slope take us? What are the potential downfalls? These all need to be considered, discussed and weighed out.

Maybe the name Dr. Hoo Suk Hwang causes you to shiver. Maybe it causes you to bow in worship. Maybe you haven’t heard of him. He’s the researcher from South Korea who is breaking ground, and possibly even moral laws, through his developments and scientific accomplishments in human and animal cloning. I’m sure you heard about the recently cloned dog and the reports of a successful, living human clone. Are you concerned? I am not surprised that this happened first in a nation in a region where life has historically been disposable. There are less of the moral “restraints” that one would encounter in the west. Oddly though, much of Korean culture considered your age to include time spent in the womb. But who am I to point out that coincidence. I think that the reason that China didn’t beat them to the goal was due to funding issues, slower momentum in China, and a little luck. But it would have been done regardless. Now what? Is he a hero, hypocrite, or human whore? Will he become the Mack-Daddy pimp of stem cells? People thought for the lat dozen years about whether they could do it. Now they need to think about whether they should do it.

What is the next new horizon for mankind? Cloning for body parts? Remember, it was China who historically slaughtered prisoners and immediately surgically removed their body parts. Sounded ethical since lives would be saved, right? Except there was the fact that some of those murdered were in prison for things such as propaganda against the mother-land, for attending a non-state-sanctioned Christian church or for political dissent. And, since testing was not up-to-par, many diseases were transmitted from these transplanted organs. Some even made their way to the U.S. where it is expressly illegal to acquire such trafficked organs.

Now what? Sex selection? Exactly. A funded study at Baylor University will study the effects of sex selection on families. Their goal? It is to ultimately demonstrate that there are no negative effects from selecting the sex of your child. After all, look what it did in countries such as China? They are scrambling now with such an almost completely male society to reverse the trend which caused female infanticide to become commonplace. Where are the feminists and women of NARAL when only females are being killed?

It will be only a matter of time once sex selection is “normalized” that one will be able to select embryos that will yield a particular hair or eye color, weight predisposition, or personality. And so, the great Aryan experiment continues in the bedrooms and Petri dishes of the world today. So, as the debate moves forward, it must do so with full consideration of the results, good and bad, moral and immoral, possible and not yet possible, until we are willing to safeguard ourselves, others and the yet unborn who will ultimately be sacrificed either as cells, or as parts for our benefit.