In the aftermath of their exchange regarding President Obama’s position on the funding of embryo destructive research involving human cloning, Douglas Kmiec (Pepperdine Law School) posed twelve questions to Robert P. George (Princeton University) regarding the policies, ethics, and science surrounding life issues, and embryo destructive research in particular. Links to Douglas Kmiec’s questions and Robert George’s responses can be found below. Once again, many thanks to Dan Gilgoff for posting this exchange.
-
Recent Articles
-
Links
-
RSS Links
4 Comments
We had a column by Prof. Kmiec in our Diocesean newspaper in Nashville this week that I, quite frankly, have ben unable to understand. It sounds almost as if Kmiec is asking for the sacrifice of embryos in order to help him with his Parkinson’s. The langauge and syntax in the last four paragraphs is just…unusual. After reading the 12 question exchange with Prof. George, I get a little more insight, but the column is an interetsting choice to appear in the Bishop’s newspaper during Holy Week. Here is a link to the paper, the column is on page 12:
http://www.dioceseofnashville.com/tnregister.pdf
I wonder if anyone is better at deciphering Prof. Kmiec than I?
Celtic Fan, here is what I got from the Kmiec article you linked.
First, rest assured, he is not asking for human embryos to be used in research for Parkinsons or anything else.
He described the President’s new policy on federal funding for stem cell research. That policy would allow funding for research using embryo stem cells, whereas Kmiec opposes that on an ethical basis; he proposes that at minimum we try to limit such uses by esablishing in the details of the president’s new policy a preference for the use of adult stem cells.
See, he is trying warn us to try to minimize the ripples from the intrinsic evil of embryonic stem cell research. That is, avoid benefiting from this kind of research, if you can’t actually stop it from happening.
That is his concern in the last four paragraphs, too.
He has Parkinsons and understands what is instore for him as this debilitation continues. He will refuse any treatment that is based on embryonic stem cell research.
The research on Parkinsons may well include embryos — the president’s policy permits funding for the use of “surplus embryos” from IVF users.
There is a double dose of intrinsic evil in that the human embryos will be used for research and embryos are created through IVF.
But how could a person know for sure the treatment he is receiving for a disease has NOT been derived from such things?
Given the state of affairs in the scientific community, and in the politics of the president and his fellows, Kmiec is not willing to risk benefiting from intrinsic evil of either kind. For him that would amount to cooperating with intrinsic evil.
Sadly, that means he probably won’t benefit even from the use of adult stem cells, if he can’t be sure that he researchers had NOT cooperated with the use of embryonic stem cells.
But I think he hopes that such distinctions might somehow be made possible for those suffering from diseases in the future. Maybe even for himself. Kmiec favors some sort of system that would be like ingredient labels on cosmetics at the store. That is, a patient could be informed that either, yes, embryos were used to create this treatment, or no, only adult stem cells were used.
As Kmiec wrote: Easier said than done.
He added, “or by me, even written down”, meaning it was easier said than written in his shaky hand.
Then he invoked the crucifixion.
As did JPII when he publicly displayed his suffering under the debilitation of disease.
What is his suffering, Kmiec implies, next to act by which Jesus “allowed himself to be put to death so that others might live.”
Kmiec will forego relief from his suffering rather than be helped at the cost of the death of human embryos.
At least, that is what I read in his article. I hope that explanation helps somewhat.
* * *
Unfortunately, Kmiec also thinks that the president’s policy statement has made a clear distinction between cloning for reproduction and cloning for research.
The problem, of course, is that cloning creates a human embryo so there is no real distinction even on a purely scientific basis. Both are cloning for reproduction. It is just that in the case of cloning for research (in which reproduction occurs when an embryo is created) the scientists have a different motivation. But there would be nothing really to prevent the use of such a cloned human being in experiments along the way to maturation right up to childbirth and beyond.
i check this site more than once a day to see when/if Dr. Kmiec has posted/will post questions for Dr. Goerge. Does anyone know when/if to expectd this?
i check this site more than once a day to see when/if Dr. Kmiec has provided any questions for Dr. George. Does anyone know when/if to expect this?