---

Return Human Embryo forum introduction Questions asked in this forum: Does this research place the role of God in question? Doesn't the benefits of embryo research outweigh any harm to the embryos? Does embryos have "human rights"? Should their be exceptions to the Congressional ban on human embryo research? Why did Congress overrule an NIH panel when they banned human embryo research? Additional Comments from Viewers. NewsHour Links March 10, 1997: Dr. Neal First of the University of Wisconsin and Dr. John Fletcher of the University of Virginia answer your questions about cloning. February 24, 1997:   A background report on the cloning of sheep in Scotland.  February 24, 1997:   A technical discussion on the science of genetic engineering.  February 24, 1997:   A discussion on the ethics of genetic engineering and cloning mammals.  April 3, 1996:   Fred De Sam Lazaro reports on scientific advances in genetic research and the ethical questions they raise.  OUTSIDE LINKS The Genetics and Public Issues Program at The National Center for Genome Resources (NCGR) discusses cloning.  Discussion of Ethics and Social Issues in Gene Research at the Human Genome Project.  Browse the University of Pennsylvania Center for Bioethics home page.

Viewer Comments Todd H. Lane of Silver Spring, MD, comments: As an agnostic, I find it very frustrating and even insulting that the Catholics church would be voicing their objection to human embryo research. In this country we have freedom of religion. Which also means the freedom not to practice religion. The church is making it difficult to cure disease and expand our understanding of the human body through selective morality. The church sees' embryo research as immoral while at the same time refusing to address the issue of child molestation that is rampant within its' own organization. I would suggest that the church first focus on their treatment of people whom are already among their ranks before deciding that they are in the position to determine the morality of scientific research. It is clear that the federal ban on embryo research has halted possibly vital scientific discovery. Therefore, I think that in the interest of health and scientific progress, the ban should be lifted and research into the possible benefits of the human embryo should begin A.S.A.P. Dr. James P. Farrell of Edgewood, KY, comments: It would appear that the embryo, with a full complement of human genetic material, is not yet capable of rendering consent for experimentation, regardless of the potential benefit to the rest of humanity. If we declare that this organism is simply to exist for our benefit, because we intend to dispose of it anyway, then the hypothetical superior extraterrestrial could justifiably take the same attitude toward fully formed human life. A superior intellectual being may consider us as useful as we consider the animal kingdom for research. It is my hope that we draw the line at this time against embryo research, and reaffirm our societal moral precedent which should consistently support the inherent value of human life, rather than a value which is somehow measured by a simplistic human standard. Amit Indap of Tucson, AZ, comments: The recent press given to genetic cloning of animals, including humans brings up an important point with how scientific community and the rest of society interact. As humanity approaches the 21st century science and technology will play a even bigger role in affecting every person's life. Complex issues of ethics will be raised. If only the biologists are knowledgeable of cloning technology and the rest of us are ignorant, this is a recipe for disaster. Now is the time for the public to learn about scientific issues that affect them. A more open line of communication between the scientists and the public will decrease the amount of fear and ignorance of topics like cloning bring. It is the responsibility of the scientists as well as non-scientists to educate and be informed about how science and technology affect society as a whole. Lalo Gonzalez of Elyria, OH, comments: I look at this issue from several different perspectives. First, as a developmental psychologist my training and review of the most recent literature points to the clear conclusion that human life begins at conception. The union of sperm and egg is the beginning of human development. There is nothing else that develops from that union but a human being. With modern technology we have been able to document the incredibly rapid development of the nervous system and circulatory system among other systems during the embryonic period. Any college textbook in human development will testify to these facts. Ethical considerations therefore, leads me to conclude that to destroy an embryo even if it has the gene for Tay-Sachs disease is tantamount to murder. Who am I to decide which life is worth living. How would this be different from deciding that a 4 year old with severe mental retardation should not be allowed to live anymore. In both cases we are talking about a human being. The only difference is their age. The fact that one is yet to be born should not matter. When an expectant mom lovingly feels her abdomen is she not thinking of a human being growing inside her. Does she not tell her other children about the brother or sister inside. It is her baby. It is a human being.

REGIONS TOPICS RECENT PROGRAMS ABOUT US FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS / FEEDS:

Support the kind of journalism done by the NewsHour...Become a member of your local PBS station.
PBS Online Privacy Policy Copyright ©1996- MacNeil/Lehrer Productions. All Rights Reserved.