Versión de HTML Básico
Beginning and Ending Life
destroyed if they have been found to be carriers of disease-producing genes?
Should a society require genetic testing of its citizens, or would mandatory
testing violate human rights and individual freedoms? If there were a
required national testing program, how would the fearful Big Brother sce
nario of the novel
1984
be avoided? Three percent of the budget for the
Human Genome Project is allocated for studies on these and related ethical
problems arising from the research.
In his essay, W. French Anderson, a research director at the National
Institutes of Health, discusses what we are now capable of doing in the area
of genetic engineering, what we will likely be able to do within a few years,
and what we should do. He argues that gene therapy for the treatment of
severe disease is acceptable, but we should not use genetic engineering for
“enhancing” humans because we do not really understand how the complex
human organism really “works.”
Anderson’s position seems consistent with Christian values. God has
given humans the ability to find treatments for many serious ailments, and
we should be able to proceed with engineering that treats human suffering.
However, we certainly are complex organisms, fearfully and wonderfully
designed by an omniscient God. Should we start to tinker with improving
our make-up, we risk producing more harm than good. We might innocently
attempt to eliminate a gene that seems undesirable, yet could prove to be
important for allowing us to function normally, in the image of God. We
need to remind ourselves that just because certain technological procedures
are available does not necessarily mean we should use them.