Terms such as gene splicing, recombinant DNA technology, and genetic engineering inspire futuristic images of mutant insects and beings that are only part human. Can such reactions be blamed on widely held misconceptions, or does genetic engineering actually pose a threat to life forms as we know them?
To address such questions, a group of scientists, physicians, ethicists, and theologians met earlier this year at Eastern College in St. Davids, Pennsylvania. The four-day event was sponsored by the American Scientific Affiliation (ASA), an organization of evangelical Christians who work in the field of science. Participants discussed applications and ethical implications of gene splicing—from the creation of “improved” living organisms to the possibility of curing hereditary disease at its genetic source.
Lewis P. Bird, cochairman of the Christian Medical Society’s ethics commission, warned against “unwarranted futuristic scenarios” that unfairly impede the advance of genetic technology. Public perceptions are generally characterized by “fear of the future, fear of the unknown, fear of scientific discovery …,” he said. “Prognostication based on unscientific speculations should be avoided and rebutted.”
Bird and others called for a clearer understanding of both the risks and the benefits of gene-splicing technology. “We serve as vice-regents of God on Earth,” said Bird. “Our stewardship over all God’s creation [includes] the reshaping of the organisms of life. [We are called to] make responsible decisions based on the data available, … to do good and not just avoid harm.”
He concluded that gene therapy (the manipulation of human DNA in order to repair defective genes) should be considered “another gift of God,” to be used wisely as part of the Christian calling to alleviate human suffering.
Opposing View
A discordant note was sounded by Andrew Kimbrell, policy director of the Foundation on Economic Trends, a public advocacy group headed by author and activist Jeremy Rifkin. “There is an invasion of inanimate concepts pushing into the living world,” he said, referring to the recent U.S. Patent Office decision to allow the patenting of higher life forms. As principal attorney for the Foundation on Economic Trends, Kimbrell has filed a number of lawsuits against the use of genetically altered organisms in the environment.
“A reverence for life means that there are limits [to the manipulation of nature],” Kimbrell told the conferees. “The natural world is created; there is a divine element to it.
“What about the transfer of human traits to animals, and what of the reverse?” he questioned. “Are we guided by curiosity and the profit motive? Can we mix and match the genetic make-up of the entire animal, plant, and insect kingdom to serve whatever needs we have now?” Kimbrell called for more federal legislation and better regulation of this rapidly developing technology.
Informal Poll
Leroy Walters, director of the Center for Bioethics of the Kennedy Institute of Ethics at Georgetown University, conducted an informal survey of conference participants on the ethics of gene therapy. Walters said the results, at points, differed significantly from national opinion as measured in a survey conducted by the Office of Technology Assessment in Washington, D.C.
No one polled at the ASA conference, for example, felt that the genetic alteration of human cells to treat disease was morally wrong, although 11 percent were unsure. In the national survey, 42 percent of those polled said such alteration would be wrong.
At the same time, conference participants expressed reservations over some forms of genetic manipulation that the general public is less concerned about. Eight out of ten conferees, for example, opposed the possible use of genetic engineering to improve the intelligence or the physical characteristics that children would inherit. Only about half the people polled nationally disapproved of such use.
The conferees agreed that public debate ought to be extended, and that informed Christians should make their opinions known. Robert Herrmann, ASA executive director and chemistry professor at Gordon College, concluded: “God has given us this field of study, and we rejoice in the possibilities it presents. There is opportunity for great blessing for mankind and opportunity for the Christian community—both lay person and scientist—to provide direction and to influence the important ethical issues involved.”
By William A. Durbin, Jr., in St. Davids,
Pennsylvania.
