Missouri’s cloning war came to the Capitol on Thursday when two Washington University scientists wrangled over research on early stem cells and the laboratory techniques used to grow them. The Kansas City Star reports the essense of their debate:
The conclusion? It comes down to whether you view the cells created by the process to be a person.Unfortunately, the question has been framed in a grossly inaccurate manner. The use of terminology is important and those predisposed to deny the value of immature humans often demean the new life by emotively representing it with characteristics erroneously not thought to be human (i.e., "clump of cells", "a group of cells in a Petri dish", etc). In doing so, an appeal is made based upon an incorrect portrayal of what the new life is, which results in a false association.
The "cells" are not just an arbitrary group of cells (e.g., blood cells) but are, by definition, a new human life possessing unique characteristics. The "clump" or "group" will not develop into a human but rather is already a human individual.
I suppose the question above could be better framed by asking, “When is a human being a person?” or “What is the value of human life?”
Robert George and Patrick Lee, in their New Atlantis article Acorns and Embryos, explain:
Each of us developed by a gradual, unified and self-directed process from the embryonic into and through the fetal, infant, child and adolescent stages of human development, and into adulthood, with his or her determinateness, unity and identity fully intact.To endorse the destruction of an immature human by classifying the individual as a group of cells is to presume that humans are valuable not because of what they are but rather because of changeable and subjective accidental characteristic such as developmental status, capability, contribution to society, etc.. To support the assertion that ESC research does not kill a human is to reject the premise that humanness is intrinsic, a principle on which equality and modern democracy are based.... But human embryos are human beings, that is, complete, though immature, members of the human species. Embryos are human individuals at an early stage of their development, just as adolescents, toddlers, infants, and fetuses are human individuals at various developmental stages.
George and Lee argue,
We value human beings precisely because of the kind of entities they are?. Indeed, that is why we consider all human beings to be equal in basic dignity and human rights ...As mentioned above, the language used to frame questions is important because it reveals significant presuppositions which drive the argument. The characterization of a human being as a group of cells is a false representation commonly used to support abortion and more recently to justify embryonic stem cell research practices involving the destruction of a human person. Intellectual honesty necessitates the rejection of such dishonest language in favor of representations that carry with it the dignity of human life, endowed by the Creator, and recognized by society.Personhood is not an accidental characteristic, that is, a characteristic which one acquires at some point after he exists and may lose at another point. One is a human person by being a living member of the human community, a member of the human species.
Update: related to the phony ban on cloning, JivinJ asks, "Why not just be truthful?"
I haven't been mistaken for a blastocyst yet, as Veep Cheney did his friend for a quail. Such myopia pervades the Bush administration, so its no wonder the prez and his Religious Reich supporters think stem cells are people. Trying to prove "scientifically" that they are, is going to fall as flat as the theological justification.
It just defies common sense to try to confer 14th Amendment rights on cells, but it can sure slow down the research for cures.
Rayilyn, you probably haven't been mistaken for a newborn either. Yet (hopefully), you would not assert your value and dignity is greater than that of an infant.
Since this post had nothing to do with the Bush administration I'll ignore the ad hominem and straw man argument that you raise on this point.
Unfortunately you continue to use and embrace the exact same logical fallacies to substantiate your position that were addressed in this post.
Your "common sense" is not an ethical basis society should conform to because it changes with your every experience and is built upon pragmatism. To date, you have not been unable to justify your desire to sacrifice newly formed humans for scientific research.
I've asserted that you and others wrongly characterize human beings on the basis of your presuppositions as a means for proving your presuppositions. Your response to my post illustrates this very point.