A research team from Columbia University has identified criteria for determining whether an embryo has died. I was aware this work was being pursued. When I was presenting at a stem cell symposium in Rome last year, Drs. Donald Landry and Howard Zucker discussed this issue, and I was impressed with their thoughtfulness and earnest desire to find a way out of the moral impasse in which we find ourselves over ESCR. Here’s the idea: If an embryo has died, then taking its stem cells would be no different than, say, removing organs or corneas from a corpse. Since no human life will have been destroyed, there would be no ethical problem. Thus, identifying the “dead” embryos for use in embryonic stem cell research could be a way for both sides of the great debate to achieve their goals and objectives.
The problem is: It ain’t about embryonic stem cells from leftover IVF embryos, anymore. It is about human cloning, which is not a synonym for stem cell research—although many biotech propagandists and their willing allies in the media pretend that it is. Moreover, the stem cell/cloning debate is about much more than the sum of its parts. At its core, it is a struggle to determine which value system will control the public policy of society.
So, I applaud the Columbia professors for working on the problem in good faith. Unfortunately, the controversy is much bigger than the relatively narrow issue they are seeking to resolve.
Moral Certitude and the Iran War
The current military engagement with Iran calls renewed attention to just war theory in the Catholic tradition.…
The Slow Death of England: New and Notable Books
The fate of England is much in the news as popular resistance to mass immigration grows, limits…
Ethics of Rhetoric in Times of War
What we say matters. And the way we say it matters. This is especially true in times…