1、Are Scientists Playing God? It Depends on Your Religion The New York Times, November 20, 2007By John TierneyNow that biologists in Oregon have reported using cloning to produce a monkey embryo and extract stem cells, it looks more plausible than before that a human embryo will be cloned and that, so
2、me day, a cloned human will be born. But not necessarily on this side of the Pacific. American and European researchers have made most of the progress so far in biotechnology. Yet they still face one very large obstacle God, as defined by some Western religions. While critics on the right and the le
3、ft fret about the morality of stem-cell research and genetic engineering, prominent Western scientists have been going to Asia, like the geneticists Nancy Jenkins and Neal Copeland, who left the National Cancer Institute and moved last year to Singapore. Asia offers researchers new labs, fewer restr
4、ictions and a different view of divinity and the afterlife. In South Korea, when Hwang Woo Suk reported creating human embryonic stem cells through cloning, he did not apologize for offending religious taboos. He justified cloning by citing his Buddhist belief in recycling life through reincarnation
5、.When Dr. Hwangs claim was exposed as a fraud, his research was supported by the head of South Koreas largest Buddhist order, the Rev. Ji Kwan. The monk said research with embryos was in accord with Buddhas precepts and urged Korean scientists not to be guided by Western ethics. “Asian religions wor
6、ry less than Western religions that biotechnology is about playing God,” says Cynthia Fox, the author of “Cell of Cells,” a book about the global race among stem-cell researchers. “Therapeutic cloning in particular jibes well with the Buddhist and Hindu ideas of reincarnation.” Most of southern and
7、eastern Asia displays relatively little opposition to either cloned embryonic stem-cell research or genetically modified crops. China, India, Singapore and other countries have enacted laws supporting embryo cloning for medical research (sometimes called therapeutic cloning, as opposed to reproducti
8、ve cloning intended to recreate an entire human being). Genetically modified crops are grown in China, India and elsewhere. In Europe, though, genetically modified crops are taboo. Cloning human embryos for research has been legally supported in England and several other countries, but it is banned
9、in more than a dozen others, including France and Germany. In North and South America, genetically altered crops are widely used. But embryo cloning for research has been banned in most countries, including Brazil, Canada and Mexico. It has not been banned nationally in the United States, but the re
10、search is ineligible for federal financing, and some states have outlawed it. Dr. Lee M. Silver, a molecular biologist at Princeton, explains these patterns by dividing spiritual believers into three broad categories. The first, traditional Christians, predominate in the Western Hemisphere and some
11、European countries. The second, which he calls post-Christians, are concentrated in other European countries and parts of North America, especially along the coasts. The third group are followers of Eastern religions. “Most people in Hindu and Buddhist countries,” Dr. Silver says, “have a root tradi
12、tion in which there is no single creator God. Instead, there may be no gods or many gods, and there is no master plan for the universe. Instead, spirits are eternal and individual virtue karma determines what happens to your spirit in your next life. With some exceptions, this view generally allows
13、the acceptance of both embryo research to support life and genetically modified crops.” By contrast, in the Judeo-Christian tradition, God is the master creator who gives out new souls to each individual human being and gives humans “dominion” over soul-less plants and animals. To traditional Christ
14、ians who consider an embryo to be a human being with a soul, it is wrong for scientists to use cloning to create human embryos or to destroy embryos in the course of research. But there is no such taboo against humans applying cloning and genetic engineering to “lower” animals and plants. As a resul
15、t, Dr. Silver says, cloned animals and genetically modified crops have not become a source of major controversy for traditional Christians. Post-Christians are more worried about the flora and fauna. “Many Europeans, as well as leftists in America,” Dr. Silver says, “have rejected the traditional Ch
16、ristian God and replaced it with a post-Christian goddess of Mother Nature and a modified Christian eschatology. It isnt a coherent belief system. It might or might not incorporate New Age thinking. But deep down, theres a view that humans shouldnt be tampering with the natural world.” Hence the opp
17、osition to genetically modified food. Because post-Christians do not necessarily share the biblical view of an omnipotent deity with the sole power to create souls, Dr. Silver says, they are less worried about scientists “playing God” in the laboratory with embryos. In places like California, reside
18、nts have voted not only to allow embryo cloning for research, but also to finance it. But sometimes the reverence for the natural world extends to embryos, leading to unlikely alliances. When conservative intellectuals like Francis Fukuyama campaigned for Congress to ban embryo cloning, some environ
19、mental activists like Jeremy Rifkin joined them. A Green Party leader in Germany, Voker Beck, referred to cloned embryonic stem-cell research as “veiled cannibalism.” Of course, many critics of biotechnology do not explicitly use religious dogma to justify their opposition. Countries like the United
20、 States, after all, are supposed to be guided by secular constitutions, not sectarian creeds. So opponents of genetically modified foods focus on the possible dangers to ecosystems and human health, and committees of scientists try to resolve the debate by conducting risk analysis. The outcome hinge
21、s more on beliefs than on scientific data. A study finding that genetically modified foods are safe might reassure traditional Christians in Kansas, but it wont stop post-Christians in Stockholm from worrying about “Frankenfood.” Similarly, some leading opponents of embryo research for cloning, like
22、 Leon Kass, say they are defending not Judeo-Christian beliefs, but “human dignity.” Dr. Kass, former chairman of the Presidents Council on Bioethics, says the special status of humans described in the Book of Genesis should be heeded not because of the Bibles authority, but because the message refl
23、ects a “cosmological truth.”The prospect of cloning children is much more distant, particularly now that researchers are becoming optimistic about obtaining stem cells without using embryos. For now, scientists throughout the world say they do not even want to contemplate reproductive cloning becaus
24、e of the risks to the child. And public-opinion polls do not show much support for it anywhere. Even if human cloning becomes safe, there may never be much demand for it, because most people will prefer having children the old-fashioned way. But some people may desperately want a cloned child perhap
25、s to replace one who died or to provide lifesaving bone marrow for a sibling and wont be dissuaded, no matter how many Christians or post-Christians try to stop them. To reach this frontier, they may just go east.1. Why is the cloning of human embryos seen as playing God in the West but not so in Asia?2. Why are some people against Genetically Modified food?3. Should scientific research be constrained by moral and religious considerations?4. Choose five difficult words from the passage. Give their meanings.
