Dr Andrew Ford asks the tough questions to help Christians understand the truth about this complex debate

Is the stem-cell debate really about cloning?

The current debate is mind-numbingly complex, full of inaccessible technical science and un-testable claims.  On the one hand we are told that so-called "therapeutic cloning' and subsequent stem cell research holds the promise of cures for many debilitating and even fatal diseases.  On the other side we have the conscious destruction of human embryos, the issues of "reproductive' cloning (which is no different to "therapeutic' cloning), the potential for the exploitation of women (particularly with pressure to supply the eggs needed for such research and techniques.).  All these are problematic for us as a society.

We live in a beautiful but broken world, a world that by God's good grace we are able to explore, use and manipulate.  The more we see and understand, the more complex it seems.  The more we can do, the greater the demands on us to be wise and discerning.  Modern science has conquered many realms and now our bodies have become the latest arena of exploration, and manipulation- with the promise of great personal gains for ourselves and those we love.  What was considered science fiction only a matter of years ago; is no longer fantasy but reality.  We are now assured that diseases that were considered incurable, are only a matter of years away from a cure.  The embryonic members of our society, which used to be hidden away in secret, with those first moments and months of life inaccessible, have now become public property- the source of debate, confusion, of hope and despair.

As we examine the embryo and the possibilities it seems to hold out, are we ready to make the monumental choices before us as individuals and as a society as we consider the best and wisest way ahead?  When assessing the promises and panacea of medical research, is it possible to see beyond ourselves and consider humanity as a whole wherever it is found?  As a nation the time for discernment is upon us.

In the past two weeks two private members bills have been presented to the Federal parliament, further opening the way for experimentation on embryos. These Bills open the way for the creation of cloned human embryo's; allow for the creation of embryos with more than two genetic parents; and even permit the creation of human-animal embryos (hybrids).  It is almost certain that one of these bills will be debated by the Federal Senate prior to their end of business for the year (1st week in November, 2006).   

Many of the relaxations that are being suggested are the same as those that in 2002 were debated and unanimously rejected by the parliament.

These issues are complicated and difficult - we must recognise this and tread carefully, seeking understanding before making changes.  This is the heavy burden on those deliberating on our behalf.

How do we wade through this complexity of the science and the debate?  I want to suggest four broad questions relating to the proposed bills which are at the heart of the matter.

Are we ready to create human embryos solely for the purpose of destroying them for research?

An embryo is an embryo no matter how it is made- whether by natural conception, by IVF, or by cloning (often call SCNT- Somatic cell nuclear transfer; cloning by any other name is still cloning).  Each of these living embryos will, if allowed, result in a live birth.  These are all human beings with potential, and worthy of protection.

Would we ever want to create people to destroy them?  Even if we gain medical advances, is this not too high a price to pay?  If it is not- where does it end?  What will be next?  Growing cloned embryos to 3 months or 6 months so we can harvest organs?  This is not scare mongering. This is what is being suggested in reputable medical-science research journals.  It is not invalid to ask these questions of those now proposing these measures (scientists and politicians alike); many of the same people who assured us in the 2002 debate that the very things they are now proposing were not "morally permissible" or were "wrong".  What has changed?

Are we ready to create human clones?

Cloning was clearly "wrong' in 2002, when the Federal government unanimously banned cloning in all forms. How can it be "right' in 2006?  Nothing   has significantly changed in the science, and when polls are done in such a way as to give people all the information required, nothing has changed in public opinion in the ethics of "creating human life in order to destroy it".
Sometimes a false distinction is made between "therapeutic' and "reproductive' cloning.  The only distinction is the intention for these "embryos'; will they be destroyed or will they be allowed to live?  All such cloning will create a living human embryo.  In reproductive cloning, the technology and techniques are identical to what is now being proposed.  Given the   dominant pragmatic approach to the ethical issues that drive the current debate, will we not eventually see someone taking the next step up that mountain? "If it is there and we can climb it, then" ..?"  Again, this is not scare mongering. Once developed there are those who have already made it clear that they intend to engage in reproductive cloning.

Are we able to protect women as the technology emerges?

The production of embryos for research (by whatever means- natural, IVF, cloning) requires human eggs, and lots of them.  Are we ready for the potential commercialisation of women's ovaries with the need to harvest many hundreds of eggs?  The other alternative to this that is proposed, is the use of other animal eggs and production of human "animal hybrids. 

How realistic are the promises of those pushing for the changes?

Four years ago we were given a lot of promises, people were given hope for themselves and those they loved, and it has come to very little.  Of course the retort will be made that the researchers needs more time, and more freedom and good will come.  But some of the past claims have just been patently false and disingenuous.  For instance among the disease we were told could be eliminated by embryonic stem research was Alzheimer's disease.  Many world experts have told us that Alzheimer’s disease will never be cured by stem cells.  This along with the high profile cases of fraud and misreporting in the embryonic stem cell field must give us cause to ask how realistic are the promises of those pushing for change?  Do they really think with good reason, that these diseases will be cured or are there other less noble reasons for pushing forward with this destructive use of embryos?

Science and embryology can tell us all sorts of information about this previously "secret' member of society. Medical practitioners can proclaim all manner of potential cures that can result from using the amazing potential from embryos.  However what science can't do and what isn't happening in the public debate is asking and answering the more fundamental questions; Who or What is this thing we call the embryo?  Is it a cellular extension, a little clump of cells that has no more significance than a flake of skin (apart from its potential)?  Or is it a new human individual, full of life and possibilities, worthy of respect, love, and the protection of others?  This is not a simple debate with simple answers from the Bible, but nevertheless there is good reason (Biblical, scientific, and philosophical) to understand the embryo as a human individual.  This crucial understanding changes the debate of embryos and cloning, and stem cells from a matter of what will best help others who are sick, to a debate about what sort of society do we want to be.  Do we value the smallest members of the human family?  Will we use each other for our own gain?  Will the strong and the influential always dictate what is right and wrong?  Will we ask "who is my neighbour?' and having recognised them, even when others would walk by on the other side or ignore them as nothing- will we stoop down and give them respect and protection?

But what can I do? 

Find out more at [url=http://www.cloning.org.au]http://www.cloning.org.au[/url]

Sign up to a general petition against these proposed changes at [url=http://www.makeastand.org.au]http://www.makeastand.org.au[/url]

Or even better write to your Federal senators assigned to your state. ([url=http://www.aph.gov.au/Senate/senators/index.htm]http://www.aph.gov.au/Senate/senators/index.htm[/url]).  It is well worth writing directly to them, as this bill will be allowed a conscience vote. Our politicians will decide from their own views and their understanding of the sentiments of the electorate.  The Christian voice should be heard on issues like this- issues of life, death and protection of the most vulnerable in our society.