Originally published in The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, November 6, 2004.
Nothing about this issue is easy --- let me say that right upfront. The science of stem cell research is extraordinarily complex. And when we talk about embryonic stem cell research, the issue moves beyond science into ethics and religion, and the field becomes even more highly charged.
I am neither a scientist nor an ethicist, but a woman of faith trying to make an informed decision, one that is morally and intellectually sound.
Scientists are asking for federal funding to do embryonic stem cell research, which they believe holds great promise for curing devastating illnesses such as Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, diabetes, spinal cord injuries and multiple sclerosis. (Stem cells are the basic building blocks for human tissues and organs.) Cures are not imminent, but over the next decade real progress may be made. Adult stem cells are available, used for blood disorders, but they do not have the broad potentialities of embryonic stem cells, many of the researchers say.
President Bush has refused to allow National Institutes of Health funding to create new embryonic stem cell lines. Destroying embryos is off-limits, he maintains, no matter how worthwhile the venture may prove to be.
Experimentation is continuing with existing stem cell lines established before 2001, but the president's decision forbids the creation of new lines with federal money. About 70 lines were estimated to be available --- but fewer than 20, it turned out, were in good enough shape to use in research.
Those who support Bush's decision argue that, even though the embryos in question are "leftovers" --- embryos that will never be implanted in a woman's uterus (and this is important to remember) --- the very fact that they are life "in potentia" means we cannot tamper with them.
Opponents of this ban, and I am one of them, believe that because the embryos will be disposed of anyway, it is wrong not to use them in an effort to alleviate real human suffering. In the hands of researchers, the embryos would be used to give life --- life to living people who suffer with crippling diseases.
Between those who would bar the door, terminate all debate, condemn as murderers those who oppose the restrictions, and those at the other extreme, who would fling the doors wide open with no restrictions, no restraints, no reverence for the sacredness of the work or the implications of what they do, are people like me --- and perhaps you --- struggling to deal with the complexities and come to a decision that reflects not only the knowledge in our minds but also the wisdom of our hearts and souls.
We should and must proceed with embryonic stem cell research, taking our lead from people of science and medical ethicists, not government legislators or ideologues. But we must do so with caution and reverence for the work and with a firm commitment never to misuse the process or the knowledge we gain --- for we are on holy ground.
Jesus was healer
Some opponents of this research have the mistaken notion that scientists will harvest these stem cells from aborted fetuses. That is not the case. The cells come from fertility clinics. They are donated by couples who no longer have need of them, and who choose to donate their surplus embryos to science. There are more than 400,000 frozen human embryos. More than 11,000 of them are available for research. Unless the ban on federal funding is lifted, they eventually may be discarded and with them the life-giving secrets they may contain.
This to me seems morally wrong and frankly senseless --- not a preservation of life but a denial of it. I don't want to claim that God is on my side (there's far too much of that going around these days), but I do believe that Jesus was a man who stood firmly on the side of life. In fact he came to Earth that we might have life and have it abundantly (John 10). His entire ministry was devoted to healing --- the crippled, the blind, the leprous, the women bent and bleeding. They came to him and he healed them. He even brought to life people who had died. When laws got in the way, he broke them --- healing a suffering woman on the Sabbath to the chagrin of the religious authorities. Human suffering grieved him, and he did all he could to ease it.
The Hebrew Scriptures also show God as deeply merciful. Skimming through my book of Psalms, I find this: "When the just cry, the Most High hears and delivers them from their troubles. God is close to the brokenhearted. . . . Many are the afflictions of the just; they will be delivered from them all. God will keep guard over all their bones, not one of them shall be broken." And this: "O God, you deliver them in the day of trouble; you guard them and give them life; . . . you sustain them on their sickbeds; you heal them of all their infirmities."
Even Orrin Hatch, the conservative Republican senator from Utah, was persuaded to support embryonic stem cell research. In a letter to the secretary of health and human services, he said: "I am proud of my strong pro-life record. . . . I conclude that this research is consistent with pro-life values [and] should proceed."
God gave us the brilliance of scientists, the wonders of technology. Is it not also possible that this good God gave us these living cells, designated for destruction? Isn't it possible he gave them to us as another source of revelation --- a pathway to miraculous discoveries that will turn mourning into dancing, give life back to innocent people who are crippled, blind, in unrelenting pain?
In our effort to protect life, we must be careful not to idolize the embryo, enshrining it like a sacred cow. We mustn't let the fear of doing something wrong keep us from doing what is right.
Insisting that undifferentiated cells must be preserved only to be destroyed --- at the very least it makes no sense; at most it may be turning our backs on grace.
Nothing about this issue is easy --- let me say that right upfront. The science of stem cell research is extraordinarily complex. And when we talk about embryonic stem cell research, the issue moves beyond science into ethics and religion, and the field becomes even more highly charged.
I am neither a scientist nor an ethicist, but a woman of faith trying to make an informed decision, one that is morally and intellectually sound.
Scientists are asking for federal funding to do embryonic stem cell research, which they believe holds great promise for curing devastating illnesses such as Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, diabetes, spinal cord injuries and multiple sclerosis. (Stem cells are the basic building blocks for human tissues and organs.) Cures are not imminent, but over the next decade real progress may be made. Adult stem cells are available, used for blood disorders, but they do not have the broad potentialities of embryonic stem cells, many of the researchers say.
President Bush has refused to allow National Institutes of Health funding to create new embryonic stem cell lines. Destroying embryos is off-limits, he maintains, no matter how worthwhile the venture may prove to be.
Experimentation is continuing with existing stem cell lines established before 2001, but the president's decision forbids the creation of new lines with federal money. About 70 lines were estimated to be available --- but fewer than 20, it turned out, were in good enough shape to use in research.
Those who support Bush's decision argue that, even though the embryos in question are "leftovers" --- embryos that will never be implanted in a woman's uterus (and this is important to remember) --- the very fact that they are life "in potentia" means we cannot tamper with them.
Opponents of this ban, and I am one of them, believe that because the embryos will be disposed of anyway, it is wrong not to use them in an effort to alleviate real human suffering. In the hands of researchers, the embryos would be used to give life --- life to living people who suffer with crippling diseases.
Between those who would bar the door, terminate all debate, condemn as murderers those who oppose the restrictions, and those at the other extreme, who would fling the doors wide open with no restrictions, no restraints, no reverence for the sacredness of the work or the implications of what they do, are people like me --- and perhaps you --- struggling to deal with the complexities and come to a decision that reflects not only the knowledge in our minds but also the wisdom of our hearts and souls.
We should and must proceed with embryonic stem cell research, taking our lead from people of science and medical ethicists, not government legislators or ideologues. But we must do so with caution and reverence for the work and with a firm commitment never to misuse the process or the knowledge we gain --- for we are on holy ground.
Jesus was healer
Some opponents of this research have the mistaken notion that scientists will harvest these stem cells from aborted fetuses. That is not the case. The cells come from fertility clinics. They are donated by couples who no longer have need of them, and who choose to donate their surplus embryos to science. There are more than 400,000 frozen human embryos. More than 11,000 of them are available for research. Unless the ban on federal funding is lifted, they eventually may be discarded and with them the life-giving secrets they may contain.
This to me seems morally wrong and frankly senseless --- not a preservation of life but a denial of it. I don't want to claim that God is on my side (there's far too much of that going around these days), but I do believe that Jesus was a man who stood firmly on the side of life. In fact he came to Earth that we might have life and have it abundantly (John 10). His entire ministry was devoted to healing --- the crippled, the blind, the leprous, the women bent and bleeding. They came to him and he healed them. He even brought to life people who had died. When laws got in the way, he broke them --- healing a suffering woman on the Sabbath to the chagrin of the religious authorities. Human suffering grieved him, and he did all he could to ease it.
The Hebrew Scriptures also show God as deeply merciful. Skimming through my book of Psalms, I find this: "When the just cry, the Most High hears and delivers them from their troubles. God is close to the brokenhearted. . . . Many are the afflictions of the just; they will be delivered from them all. God will keep guard over all their bones, not one of them shall be broken." And this: "O God, you deliver them in the day of trouble; you guard them and give them life; . . . you sustain them on their sickbeds; you heal them of all their infirmities."
Even Orrin Hatch, the conservative Republican senator from Utah, was persuaded to support embryonic stem cell research. In a letter to the secretary of health and human services, he said: "I am proud of my strong pro-life record. . . . I conclude that this research is consistent with pro-life values [and] should proceed."
God gave us the brilliance of scientists, the wonders of technology. Is it not also possible that this good God gave us these living cells, designated for destruction? Isn't it possible he gave them to us as another source of revelation --- a pathway to miraculous discoveries that will turn mourning into dancing, give life back to innocent people who are crippled, blind, in unrelenting pain?
In our effort to protect life, we must be careful not to idolize the embryo, enshrining it like a sacred cow. We mustn't let the fear of doing something wrong keep us from doing what is right.
Insisting that undifferentiated cells must be preserved only to be destroyed --- at the very least it makes no sense; at most it may be turning our backs on grace.