wfn.org | UCC / Church committee releases cloning statement

[powellb@ucc.org]

June 9, 1997
United Church of Christ                   
In Cleveland:                             
Arthur Cribbs, (216) 736-2201
E-mail:  cribbsa@ucc.org                  
Hans Holznagel, (216) 736-2214
E-mail:  holznagh@ucc.org
In Pittsburgh:
Dr. Ronald Cole-Turner
(412) 441-3304, ext. 2170                             
            
In Berkeley, Calif.:
Dr. Karen Lebacqz
(510) 849-8250
On the World Wide Web:                    
http://www.ucc.org                              

                                          
National church committee issues statement on cloning

      CLEVELAND -- An ad-hoc committee on genetics
appointed by a national agency of the United Church of
Christ today said "'enough' to technologies that are
privileges of the rich in the Western world" and called
for laws "to ban cloning for reproductive purposes, at
least for the foreseeable future."
      A 10-member Committee on Genetics, appointed by
the Cleveland-based United Church Board for Homeland
Ministries, issued the public statement on the same
afternoon that President Clinton received a report on
cloning from the National Bioethics Advisory Commission. 
The UCC committee included theologians, ethicists and a
biologist.  Nine of its members belong to the 1.5-
million-member UCC.
      Here are the text of the statement and the names
of the committee members:
      "The following is a statement of the United Church
of Christ Committee on Genetics and is not an official
statement of the United Church of Christ.  The Committee
on Genetics was appointed by the United Church Board for
Homeland Ministries, in cooperation with the United
Church Board for World Ministries, the Office for Church
in Society, and the Council for Health and Human Service
Ministries.  The Committee will submit this statement
for consideration as a resolution at the 21st General
Synod of the United Church of Christ, meeting in
Columbus, Ohio, July 3-8, 1997.

      "The announcement in February of the birth of
Dolly the cloned sheep raises important ethical and
religious questions.  We who serve on the United Church
of Christ Committee on Genetics are grateful for the
careful and dedicated work of scientists such as Ian
Wilmot and for the ways in which their discoveries can
improve human health.  We acknowledge that scientists
themselves have been among the first to call for 
restraint in this field of research.  We also applaud
the request by President Clinton that the National
Bioethics Advisory Commission (NBAC) prepare a report on
the ethics of cloning, and that NBAC eagerly sought the
opinions of religious leaders in preparing its report. 
Because we  believe that all new technologies should be
developed with due regard for morality and social
justice, we urge the continuation of the Bioethics
Commission as a national forum for discussion of the
ethics of emerging  fields of research, including human
cloning and germ-line experimentation.

"1.  Regarding the Use of Cloning to Produce a Human
Person.  

      "The United Church of Christ is fundamentally
committed to justice.  We experience a tension with
regard to cloning, therefore.  On the one hand, we are
aware that our culture has allowed, even encouraged, the
development of many technologies geared to permit
couples to have children "of their own" -- meaning,
children who are genetically related to them.  Cloning
might allow some couples to have children whose genes
come from that couple and are not an admixture with
genes from "outside" the committed relationship.  Thus,
on the one hand, justice seems to press for allowing the
same privileges (some would say rights) for those
couples as are currently allowed for others.

      "At the same time, a concern for justice raises
questions about the validity of all new reproductive
technologies -- artificial insemination, in vitro
fertilization, etc.  When the world groans with hunger,
when children are stunted from chronic malnutrition,
when people die of famine by the thousands every day --
when this is the reality of the world in which we live,
the development of any more technologies to suit the
desires of those who are relatively privileged, secure,
and comfortable seems to fly in the face of fundamental
claims of justice.

      "For this reason, in spite of our empathy with
couples who might seek cloning in order to have children
'of their own,' we oppose cloning and say 'enough' to
technologies that are privileges of the rich in the
Western world.  We support legislation to ban cloning
for reproductive purposes, at least for the foreseeable
future.

      "At the same time, should someone produce a cloned
child, we would insist absolutely that such a child is
a full human being, created in the image of God and
entitled to all human and civil rights.  This conviction
is grounded both in our theological belief in the
uniqueness of each person as a child of God and in the
insights of genetics, which show us that genes and
environment interact at every stage to produce the
phenotype or the organism.  Accordingly, we believe that
while genes can be cloned or copied, the phenotype or
the person cannot be cloned or copied but is always a
unique expression of the interplay between genes and
environment.  We recognize that there is widespread
confusion among the general public about the role of
genes in determining who we are as persons.  In this
respect, genetic science and Christian faith agree in 
criticizing what is sometimes called "genetic
determinism."  We hope the United Church of Christ will
play a helpful role in educating the public  about the
important but quite limited role of genes in determining
the full meaning of human identity and personhood. 

      "In addition to these fundamental concerns
regarding justice and respect for all created life,
members of the committee raised the following concerns:

      "First, there is evidence that the current state
of technique of nuclear transfer cloning is far too
imprecise to meet minimal expectations of safety that
should be met before they are applied to human beings. 
Whether the safety level can be improved sufficiently
through research with other mammals will  remain to be
seen.  It is possible the future research will remove
this concern.  Our second and third reasons, however,
are moral in nature and  are not likely to be affected
by the future level of technical ability.   

      "Second, it is possible that a child produced by
cloning would suffer from an overwhelming burden of
expectations.  Anyone wanting to create such a child
would have a prior knowledge of what this child's genes
could become and would in part make the decision to
clone on the basis of that knowledge.  That prior
knowledge would  create a weight of expectation against
which such a child would have to define his or her own
identity.  Precisely because "genetic determinism" is so
widespread in contemporary culture, this weight of
expectation would likely be inconsistent with the
freedom necessary for each person to develop an
individual identity.

      "Third, many observers believe that it is
beneficial for children to have the genetic resources of
two adults that are recombined to form a genotype that
is unique and yet tied genetically to both adults.  This
assures that in terms of nuclear DNA, the child is
related to both adults yet different from either.  If
children were produced by nuclear transfer cloning,
their nuclear DNA would not have this relatedness and
this difference.  

"2.  Regarding the Use of Cloning to Produce Human
Pre-Embryos for Research.

      "Nuclear transfer cloning might also be used to
produce human pre-embryos for research purposes through
the 14th day of embryonic development.  It is very
likely that through such means, scientists could learn
a great deal about basic human developmental biology and
that this knowledge might someday lead to treatments for
degenerative conditions or to counteract some forms of
sterility.  Whether such research is  permissible
ultimately raises the question of the theological and
moral status of the human pre-embryo.  Beginning with
the 8th General Synod in 1971, various General Synods of
the United Church of Christ have regarded the human
pre-embryo as due great respect, consistent with its
potential to develop into full human personhood. 
General Synods have not, however, regarded the
pre-embryo as the equivalent of a person.  

      "Therefore, we on the United Church of Christ
Committee on Genetics do not object categorically to
human pre-embryo research, including research that
produces and studies cloned human pre-embryos through
the 14th day of fetal development, provided the research
is well-justified in terms of its objectives, that the
research protocols show proper respect for the
pre-embryos, and that they not be implanted.  We urge
public discussion of current research and future
possibilities, ranging from pre-implantation genetic
screening of human pre-embryos to nuclear transfer
cloning to human germ-line experimentation.  We do not
categorically oppose any of these areas of research, but
we believe they must be pursued, if at all, within the
framework of broad public discussion.  In 1989, the 17th
General Synod of the United Church of Christ stated that
it was "cautious at present about procedures that would
make genetic changes which humans would transmit to
their offspring (germline therapy).  . . . We urge
extensive public discussion and, as appropriate, the
development of federal guidelines during the period when
germline therapy becomes feasible."  We would urge
legislation to ensure that all research on human pre-
embryos even that which is privately funded would be
reviewed by Institutional Review Boards in accordance
with federal regulations.

      "Now with the possibility of human cloning by
nuclear transfer, this call for public discussion
becomes all the more urgent.  Current US federal law
prohibits the use of federal funding for all pre-embryo
research.  Such research occurs in other countries and
in the United States, funded by private sources.  As a
result, human pre-embryo research proceeds legally in
the US, but there is little or no public discussion of
its ethics.   

      "We on the United Church of Christ Committee on
Genetics are opposed to the idea that human pre-embryo
research, such as human germ-line experimentation or
research involving cloned pre-embryos, should be
permitted but left largely unregulated if funded
privately, or that there is no federal responsibility
for the ethics of such research if federal funds are not
used.  We believe that this approach merely seeks to
avoid the difficult public deliberation that should
occur prior to such research.  We believe that all such
research should be subject to broad public comment and
that it should only proceed within a context of public
understanding and general public support.  

"3.  Regarding Cloning of Non-Human Mammalian Species.

      "We on the United Church of Christ Committee on
Genetics believe that the use of nuclear transfer
cloning in research on non-human mammalian species is
morally and theologically permissible, provided, of
course, that animals be treated humanely and that
needless suffering is avoided.  Nevertheless, we are
concerned that the use of nuclear transfer cloning,
together with other genetic and reproductive
technologies, will contribute to a diminished regard for
non-human species.  In particular, we lament the
attitude that non-human species have no inherent dignity
or significance beyond their usefulness to human beings. 
We confess with regret that in the past, the Christian
church itself has often encouraged such a utilitarian
view of non-human species.  In contrast to our own past,
the General Synod of the United Church of Christ stated
in 1989 that "God is Creator of all and confers value
upon all creatures.  . . . Therefore, we respect each
creature as valuable to God beyond its apparent
usefulness to us."  Such an attitude of respect does not
entirely preclude our use of animals in research or for
other  purposes.  But we are concerned that cloning,
together with other  technologies, might contribute to
the view that nonhuman animals, particularly mammals,
are little more than pharmaceutical factories, or
convenient sources of donor organs for human patients,
or valuable research tools.  While we do not object
specifically to any of these uses of mammalian nuclear
transfer cloning, we are concerned nonetheless that
these uses will contribute to a disregard for the
dignity that all nonhuman species enjoy by virtue of
their relation to God the Creator.  Further, because of
the danger of narrowing genetic diversity (and thus of
diminishing the God-given complexity of creation) we do
not think that animal cloning should ever be widely
used, for instance in agricultural applications."

Members of the committee:

Mal Bertram, Pastor, South Wellfleet, Mass.
Representing the Office for Church in Society, UCC

Audrey Chapman, AAAS, Washington, D.C.

Ching-fen Hsiao, Area Executive for East Asia and the
Pacific, United Church Board for World Ministries, UCC,
New York City

Ronald Cole-Turner, Professor, Pittsburgh Theological
Seminary

Karen Lebacqz, Professor, Pacific School of Religion,
Berkeley, Calif.

Audrey Miller, General Secretary, Education and
Publication, United Church Board for Homeland
Ministries, UCC, Cleveland

Arlene Nehring
Council for Health and Human Service Ministries, UCC,
Cleveland

Frances J. Ruthven, Pastor, Hinsdale, Mass.

Brent Waters, ethicist, Oxford, England

Olivia Masih White, Dallas, Texas
Biologist, Department of Biological Sciences, University
of North Texas