For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.
—Ephesians 6:12
The Times story, by veteran science writer Gina Kolata, notes that one of the reasons many scientists have opposed human cloning is the high rate of defects among clones. And indeed, she goes on to report, to produce those 24 allegedly perfect specimens, Advanced Cell Technology created no fewer than 500 clones, of which only 30 survived to birth, and of those only 24 to adulthood.
Nevertheless, the researcher who directed the project, Dr. Robert Lanza, isn't shy about the implications of his work. A proposed ban on human cloning passed the House but stalled in the Senate last summer and was put on the back burner after September 11. The 24 cows, Lanza claims, render the proposal moot. After all, such legislation was "fueled by" the "desire to portray human cloning as dangerous and irresponsible." But now, he says, "it's important to put some science in here, some reality."
Ah, Science. Ah, Reality. But wait a minute. Today Dr. Lanza is back in the Times in another story by Kolata: "Company Says It Produced Human Embryo Clones." The clones were produced in October: "Most died within a day or so," Kolata writes. "Six lasted for five days." But the announcement was made only yesterday, three days after the announcement of the "normal" cow clones. In short, it becomes clear that the story of the defect-free cows was released to pave the way for the release of today's story. (Question: Was Kolata aware of this when she wrote the story that appeared on Friday?) And Dr. Lanza's assessment of the human embryo cloning? "These are exciting preliminary results."
* * *
When your cat has kittens, the children crowd around. Looking over their shoulders, you're struck by the way each kitten in the litter is already distinct from the others. That calico one is feisty; this one, with a Siamese hue, isn't getting enough milk. One kitten seems not to be moving at all.
The funeral is held in the back yard; the grave lies beneath the branches of the plum tree. That bundle of life is gone for good.
A cat is buried; a person is buried. Is there any essential difference?
* * *
At a large state university, a professor is fired after an uproar over comments he made in class. According to his critics, he employed racist stereotypes. Across the campus, in another building, a distinguished professor of cognitive science is lecturing to a packed house. Human beings, he says, quoting Marvin Minsky, are machines made of meat. The students dutifully write that down.
* * *
"Physical composition and cultural disposition were confused in Chinese antiquity," Frank Dikotter tells us in his book The Discourse of Race in Modern China:
The border between man and animal was blurred. "The Rong are birds and beasts." This was not simply a derogatory description: it was part of a mentality that integrated the concept of civilization with the idea of humanity, picturing the alien groups living outside the pale of Chinese society as distant savages hovering on the edge of bestiality. The names of the outgroups were written in characters with an animal radical, a habit that persisted until the 1930s: the Di, a northern tribe, were thus assimilated with the dog, whereas the Man and the Min, people from the south, shared the attributes of the reptiles. The Qiang had a sheep radical.
* * *
With a daughter nearing the end of high school, you begin to receive dozens of glossy promotional brochures from colleges and universities. The pictures in one brochure look like the pictures from another. Many of the pictures are of smiling students. Whatever the text says, the pictures suggest that college is an extraordinarily harmonious place. The text says, somewhere, that this college will teach students to think for themselves, but the pictures say that all right-thinking people are pretty much agreed on the essentials.
You would never guess from these pictures that the smiling young woman with the auburn hair and the slim young man with the crooked grin, sitting next to her on the quad, see the world in very different ways. He thinks that when you die, you're dead; that's it. How did we get here? Who knows? "A glorious accident," Stephen Jay Gould calls it; let's leave it at that. Meanwhile, he has a life to live. She believes that the core of herself, her soul, will survive death to dwell with the God who created her, and us, and everything.
Like it or not, we're engaged in conflict—not necessarily a physical conflict (though it can turn physical very quickly) but rather a conflict of interpretations, a conflict of ideas, a spiritual conflict: a conflict about the nature of reality and our place in it.
Article continues below
John Wilson is editor of Books & Culture and editor-at-large for Christianity Today.
Yahoo's full coverage has current news articles and opinion pieces on human cloning.
The House passed a bill in July banning human cloning. Not long after, a team of scientists stirred up controversy by saying they would do it anyway. Three scientists addressed a National Academies of Science conference on Aug. 7 and revealed their plans to possibly clone humans by the end of the year.
While we pray for peace, we need moral clarity about this war.
A Christian reconciliation group in Israel and Palestine warned that war would come. Now the war threatens their relevance.العربيةFrançais
But experts say it can offer opportunities for leaders and congregations to grow.
