Human or Superhuman? Catholic Church teaching on human genetic engineering

Friday, May 4. 2012

Human or Superhuman? Catholic Church teaching on human genetic engineering

My latest piece introducing National Catholic Register readers to Church teaching on human genetic engineering:

Human genetic engineering has always been the stuff of science-fiction novels and blockbuster Hollywood films. Except that it is no longer confined to books and movies.

Scientists and doctors are already attempting to genetically alter human beings and our cells. And whether you realize it or not, you and your children are being bombarded in popular media with mixed messages on the ethics surrounding human genetic engineering.

So what does the Church say about the genetic engineering of humans?

The majority of Catholics would likely say that the Church opposes any genetic modification in humans. But that is not what our Church teaches. Actually, the Church does support human genetic engineering; it just has to be the right kind.

Surprised? Most Catholics probably are.

Continue Reading at the National Catholic Register >>

Posted by Rebecca Taylor in Genetic Engineering at 08:57 | Comments (3) | Trackbacks (0)

Trackbacks

Trackback specific URI for this entry

No Trackbacks

Comments

Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)

What? A large number of Catholics are uninformed as to the Church's teaching on a bioethics matter?

Why, I'm shocked. Almost too shocked for words.

This is my problem with a lot of people who oppose Transhumanism: they basically argue "if man were meant to fly, he'd have been born with wings". The real argument is that we can make a machine to do anything...and we'll own that machine once we make it. But we do not own ourselves, or our bodies.

A lot of libertarian arguments on many issues, genetic enhancement among them, hinge on the idea that you own your body. Only, who's you? Body-self dualism is bad metaphysics, especially since the sort of person who usually makes that argument is more often than not a materialist. (The argument that you "own" yourself is even worse—"self-self" dualism is just laughably incoeherent.)

Incidentally, RE: how we can make machines to do things, rather than modifying ourselves, anyone who prefers the alternative is regressive. One of the key traits of anatomically modern humans is that, rather than adapting our bodies, we adapt our tools. The "Kurzweil Singularity", where biological evolution ended and was replaced by technological evolution, happened in the Upper Paleolithic.

#1 Tom in AZ on 2012-05-05 13:43 (Reply)

Organized content is the best way to display or post an article, thank you for making it easy to digest your post.

#1.1 JohnMichel (Homepage) on 2012-05-07 10:21 (Reply)

Frankly, I tend to be even more cautious than the Church on this topic. This raises the question for me of the morality of changing the essential nature of who we are at conception and as we develop in the womb. Where do you draw the line? Is an embryo with Trisonomy abnormal or is that embryo going to develop into the person God meant them to be?

What about homosexuality? Is that an abnormality to potentially be changed with "therapy"? Or is it simply a characteristic like skin color or body type that is part of the human continuum and changing it amounts to "enhancement" to make their way easier in society? Who decides what is abnormal and what is simply a normal human varient, like albinism or red hair or left handedness for instance? If some abnormalities can be altered, what does that mean for children whose parents chose not to alter them? Will the parents be charged with child abuse or the child discriminated against by the state in say, educational assistance?

Regarding tranhumanistic enhancements - how many organs can be transplanted or regrown or body parts be replaced with bioengineered devices before we say it's messing with what is God's province and attempting to deny death? Does the Church have a number or even think a guideline is possible? Or will the Church by default end up supporting the quest to live forever? How long can the Church justify their refusal to accept technologies like IVF while allowing genetic intervention/manipulation in utero that may change the very nature of the original zygote?

Frankly I see the potential for the Church's support of genetic therapies to become a monster that is unstoppable once it starts - in fact perhaps it even started with organ transplants which is hardly 'Natural' in any sense of the word. I see the Church constantly fighting and losing an ever evolving, ever more complex moral argument. And lastly, all this money spent on researching these therapies when we can't even provide basic health care for every citizen. Is that even moral?

#2 Oregon Catholic on 2012-05-12 16:07 (Reply)

Add Comment

Name
Email
Homepage
In reply to
Comment	E-Mail addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for E-Mail notifications. To prevent automated Bots from commentspamming, please enter the string you see in the image below in the appropriate input box. Your comment will only be submitted if the strings match. Please ensure that your browser supports and accepts cookies, or your comment cannot be verified correctly. Enter the string from the spam-prevention image above: Enclosing asterisks marks text as bold (word), underscore are made via _word_. Standard emoticons like :-) and ;-) are converted to images.
	Remember Information? Subscribe to this entry