To Clone Or Not To Clone
by Hugh Ross
Dr. Hugh Ross earned his Ph.D. in astronomy from the University of Toronto
and researched galaxies and quasars at the California Institute of Technology.
He is president of Reasons To Believe, an organization founded to develop new
tools for demonstrating the factual basis for belief in God and the Bible. Ross
speaks regularly throughout the U.S. and around the world; has written three
books; published numerous articles in professional and popular publications;
and appears frequently on radio and television programs.
A cloud of moral confusion seems to surround recent advances in
cloning research. When British zoologists announced Dolly the sheep,
the first mammal successfully cloned from an adult cell,1 my
phone became extra busy. Secular media spokesmen wanted my comments on
this development, which they assumed Christians would view as evil,
perhaps on a par with abortion and euthanasia. They made clear their
expectation that I, as an evangelical scientist, would oppose any and
all cloning experiments.
I believe their expectationand that expressed by many who
called in to talk showsis based on some misconceptions. And these
I would like to dispel. First let me put Dolly in perspective. She was
not the first mammal ever cloned in a lab. Many others, including
rhesus monkeys,2 have been cloned from one, two, and
four-celled embryos. Dolly was simply the first mammal cloned from
adult cells, a more dffficult achievement scientifically than embryonic
cloning (Dolly was the first success in 277 attempts), but with the
advantage of more predictable results: We can see an adults
physical characteristics.
Like any tool humans develop, cloning can be used for good or for
evil. Dynamite was invented to help build railroads, but some use it to
blow up their enemies. Knives are used every day to save lives as well
as to take them. The tool is neutral, but man's use of it is not.
The caution most of us feel about cloning arises from the time lag
between its availability for use and the establishment of moral-ethical
standards by which its use will be guided. Our societys track
record in setting and enforcing biblical standards gives us reason for
concern.
It may be helpful to consider that God invented cloning. He designed
biological reproduction, and He made identical twins possible. And
while such twins have virtually identical bodies, they are not identical
in every respect. In the case of mammals, they do not have
identical personalities. In the case of humans, each twin has his or
her own distinct intellectual, emotional, psychological, and spiritual
life.3
While God has granted His creatures their part in physical
procreation, He alone creates the spirit of a human being. Regardless
of how we choose to bring a child into the world, God, at or near the
moment of conception, places a spirit in the body.4 This is
what makes abortion wrong. We are terminating the God-ordained earthly
journey of a newly formed spiritual being.
Some decisions about the uses of cloning will be easy; others will be
difficult, and we'll need to call upon God for direction. One tough
dilemma has already been addressed in the British journal, Nature.
A molecular biologist published his opinion that the parents of a
fatally injured child should be allowed the option of a clone from
viable cells still recoverable from their dying childs
body.5 Whether or not such an option should be offered is a
complicated issue, to say the least. But even if this option were
allowed, it would not give back the lost child. The parents would (if
such cloning were successful) receive a completely different child in a
body nearly identical to that of the child they lost. These facts
demand careful consideration.
The simpler moral questions, at least for Christians, would be those
about human cloning to develop a "master race" or to produce
organs for transplant purposes. We have clear biblical mandates against
such applications. However, cloning animals for medicines, organs, and
body parts to benefit ill or injured humans is a different matter. We
would need to follow Gods directives for humane treatment of animals,
but this type of cloning may be possible without violating His commands.
Cloning animals that produce healthier milk or meat or superior wool
would simply refine what Jacob started nearly 4,000 years ago.6
However, caution and careful management are required. If cloning were
allowed to diminish or eliminate genetic diversity, we could be setting
ourselves up for agricultural and ecological disasters.
More than ever, we need humility and wisdom from God to manage the
capabitities He is allowing us to grasp. May we avail ourselves of His
moral resources. May we Christians obey His command to pray for those in
influential, decision-making positions.
References
- Ian Wilmut, et al, "Viable Offspring Derived From
Fetal and Adult Mammalian Cells," Nature,
385 (1997), pp. 810-813.
- Elizabeth Pennisi and Nigel Williams, "Will Dolly Send in
the Clones?" Science, 275 (1997), pp. 14l5-1416.
- 1 Corinthians 15:35-54, The Holy Bible, New International
Version.
- Psalms 139:13-16, 51:5, The Holy Bible, New International
Version.
- Mike Fainzilber, "Advantage of Knowing Natures
Secrets," Nature, 386 (1997), p. 431.
- Genesis 30:31-43, The Holy Bible, New International
Version.
Copyright © 1997 Reasons To Believe. All rights reserved.
This article reproduced by permission from Facts & Faith (Second Quarter, 1997), a
publication of Reasons to Believe.
Be a TLC Lifeguard
Before You Leave...
We hope you enjoy our web site and find it useful as a resource center.
Please take a moment to rate our site.
Will you help?
Will you help us continue to make this resource
available to thousands of monthly visitors from around the world?
Yes
Texans for Life Coalition
P.O. Box 177727
Irving, TX 75017-7727
(972) 790-9044
webservant@texlife.org
|