BERKELEY, Calif., Aug. 9 /PRNewswire/ -- Below is a partial statement
offered by Dr. Ted Peters, a Lutheran minister and Mr. Gaymon Bennett, a
Wesleyan Theologian.  Both work at the Center for Theology and the Natural
Sciences in Berkeley, CA however are speaking independent of their affiliation
with CTNS.

    During President Bush's recent visit to Rome, Pope John Paul II stated
that support of embryonic stem cell research evidences a trajectory of moral
corruption, a "coarsening of consciousness" that finds its birth in "the
assault on innocent human life in the womb" and its maturity in acquiescence
before such evils as infanticide and euthanasia.  Support of embryonic stem
cell research, it would seem, bespeaks moral desensitization.
    The accusation is not new.  It is a rehearsal of rhetoric made familiar in
the abortion debate.  In fact, opponents of embryonic stem cell research have
cast the debate surrounding this research as nothing but the next chapter in
the abortion controversy.  With all due respect the Holy Father, however, the
ethical issues involved with this research are far too complex to be reduced
to a simple assessment.  Portraying the stem cell debate as the abortion
controversy is at best intellectually misleading, at worst ethically
negligible.  Claiming a moral monopoly, opponents of embryonic stem cell
research appear to overlook fundamental theological and ethical principles
that might inspire support of this research.
    The moral poignancy of the stem cell debate lies not in its proximity to
the abortion controversy, but in the wider question of the potential good
promised by this research.  Stem cell research is morally significant because
of its promise of healing.
    William Safire, in a recent New York Times article rightly described
progress in stem cell research as possibly the most stunning news in the
medical sciences in decades: with the help of stem cells, the body may be able
to regenerate itself.  Teaching the body to heal itself, stem cell therapies,
if predictions are accurate, may ease the suffering of millions inflicted with
such debilitating diseases as Parkinson's, heart and liver failure, juvenile
diabetes, Alzheimer's and cancer.
    With this potential to revolutionize medicine, why is it that the
President, the Pope, governments and religions worldwide have been tied up for
months in the debate over this research?  The reason is simple: the most
promising stem cells appear to be those harvested from fertilized eggs --
embryos -- that are destroyed in obtaining the stem cells.  The fact that
current research uses embryos slated for the disposal in in vitro
fertilization laboratories has not helped untie the ethical knots that have us
bound in our current moral impasse.
    Since the inception of the stem cell debate we have been studying the
science of this research closely, all the while weighing its ethical
implications.  It is our considered judgment that not only is this research
morally permissible, but that there is an ethical and theological mandate to
actively support it.  To do otherwise, we have concluded, would be negligent.
In short, to not support stem cell research is unethical ...
    For the complete text of this article, please contact Silas Deane, Logic
Media Group at Silas@LogicMediaGroup.com or call (615) 319-6007.   Dr. Peters
and Mr. Bennett are speaking independent of the Center for Theology and the
Natural Sciences on this matter.

Link to this page: