Ask yourself: how often are humans cloned? Answer: never. So
when every respectable newspaper in the country reported the
friendly people at Clonaid (the scientific wing of the Raelians)
had “successfully” cloned a human being, they brought a
message to the people of Earth: cloning isn’t just for the
movies anymore.
Cloning humans is not only a scientific question but also a
political one. Policy decisions we make today have implications for
tomorrow in terms of life, death and our definition of
humanity.
Currently, the Bush administration is considering a blanket ban
that would prohibit both reproductive and therapeutic cloning.
Therapeutic cloning results in the production of stem cells for
therapies without creating a developed human like reproductive
cloning does. Such anti-cloning rhetoric as the blanket ban has
stifled the progress of life-saving treatments and prompted a
migration of American scientists abroad to more welcoming
environments. Dr. Roger Peterson, a renowned embryologist, traded
in his spot at University of California, San Francisco, for a lab
in Cambridge.
Cloning, however, will not stop with a domestic ban on research.
The curiosity that is in our human nature will propel scientists
beyond America’s borders to test the prospects of this
science.
For some advice, the United States should look to Britain, where
scientific research proceeds efficiently and responsibly. There,
British researchers are allowed to conduct research on cloning
embryos for stem cells, a process which could cure diabetes,
various cancers, and Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s
diseases. Such work, I should note, is governed by well-defined
regulations. Surplus embryos from in-vitro fertilization clinics
that would otherwise be discarded (killed) are available for
research, given patient permission. More important, the British
government explicitly prohibits any attempts at reproductive
cloning.
The British system is an example of an effective, yet
responsible strategy. This example, however, does not ensure that
the rest of the world will follow suit. It does establish a norm
that all conscientious scientists would abide by, so long as their
governments give consent. This norm could only grow stronger with
the United States on board, thus precluding future incidents of
Raelian clones.
There is a chance the present administration will ultimately
proscribe therapeutic cloning in its haste to prevent reproductive
cloning. If that’s the case, the administration will face an
ethical dilemma should the day come when international research has
produced cures. That is, if Britain cures cancer with therapies
derived from therapeutic cloning research, which is banned in the
United States, would or should Americans be allowed access to such
treatments?
The point is, we need a strategy to address the evolution and
boundaries of scientific research. Science, driven by our innate
curiosities, will find a way to proceed, irrespective of any
domestic laws. We must establish a norm in the United States that
takes into account ethical concerns as well as those of patients
suffering from debilitating diseases.
I am against scientific progress for the sake of progress when
it is at the expense of humanity. The goal with cloning (namely,
therapeutic) is not scientific bragging rights, as Clonaid may have
demonstrated. It is to save and improve the quality of life and do
so responsibly. With an appropriate strategy governing our
scientific decisions, we can do just that ““ and save the
Raelian-like claims for the Enquirer.