They are against treatments such as IVF, which involves fertilising several eggs and throwing them away or using them for experimentation, and is considered to be the same as abortion. They are also against treatments involving masturbation by the male because it is ‘unnatural’ and therefore considered a sin. AID and surrogacy include anonymity of donors which Catholics believe is a denial of the rights of children and is wrong.
Other Christians who are not Roman Catholic allow IVF and AIH because they believe that it is using human intelligence to help others. Unlike Roman Catholics they do not think an embryo is human life, instead they think it has the potential for human life. They believe that the discarded embryos can be justified by the doctrine of double effect; their intention is to produce children for childless couples, not to kill embryos. Although none has actually been banned, all the churches have major concerns about the other embryo technology, and the issues raised. For example the problems of who the parent is could lead to problems in terms of identity for the children. These fertility treatments have raised many moral and legal issues. To resolve these issues and to protect the new technologies from being abused, The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act were passed in 1990. Included in the act were things such as:
- Complete anonymity for semen, egg or embryo donors.
- A woman giving birth as a result of egg or embryo donation should be regarded as the child’s mother in law. And the donor should be have no rights or duties relating to the child. Etc.
However the rules have changed:
- Anonymity will no longer be allowed to donors of eggs or sperm after April 1 2005.
- When donor-conceived children reach 18, they will be entitled to know the identity of their genetic parent, but will not occur before 2023.
- Egg and sperm donors will continue to have no legal or financial responsibility for children born from their genetic material.
The Muslim and other Christian views (not the Roman Catholic) are very similar. Most Muslims accept IVF and AIH because they believe that these treatments are using medicine to bring about the family life using all Muslims are expected to have. They also believe that all children should be born into married couples, which is what IVF and AIH allow. Unlike the Roman Catholic Church, Muslims feel that the discarded embryos are not foetuses and their destruction is consequently justifiable.
However, although IVF and AIH are accepted, Islamic Lawyers have banned all other types of embryo technology because anything which involves the children not knowing who both the parents are cannot be right, and is very similar to adoption which is also banned in Islam, apart from certain special circumstances. A child who has no family to care for her/him may be adopted by a Muslim family as long as the child keeps her/his own name and identity and has no right to inherit anything from the adopted parents. This type of adoption is allowed in Islam as it is seen as an act of loving-kindness towards a child without a family.
“In Islam, family life is governed by laws taken directly from the Qur’an and the Sunnah…hence there are areas and topics where changes in those laws cannot even be contemplated…No Muslim man is allowed to donate sperm to a woman who is not his legal wife and no woman is allowed to donate an egg to another woman…if a married woman conceives using sperm from a third party because her husband is infertile, this is adultery…if a woman carries an embryo fertilised with the sperm and egg of another couple, the child legally belongs to the surrogate mother.” – Statement from the Islamic Shari’ah Council of Britain.
Aiii) Explain why religious people may have problems with transplant surgery
Transplant surgery is the use of organs taken from one person and put into another person to replace organs which are malfunctioning or diseased. There is now a wide range of organs that can successfully be transplanted, however, organs must be compatible and drugs usually have to be used to prevent the donated organ from being rejected by the host. There are two types: organs from a dead person and organs from a living person. Other people disagree with it because there are concerns about when a donor is pronounced dead. I will be describing two different religious beliefs: Christianity and Muslims’ views, as well as non-religious views.
There are many arguments in favour of transplant surgery because it is a very effective and proven method of curing life-threatening diseases and gives life and hope. It uses organs that would otherwise be buried or burned and can improve peoples lives, for example cornea grafting which gives sight to the blind. However there are also many arguments against transplant surgery. Transplant surgery causes debates and controversy because it raises the moral problem of when a person is considered dead. Such things as heart transplants require the heart to be removed before it had stopped beating and although contemporary medical science have leaned towards “brain-dead” as the definition of death, many people believe that the heart is what defines the person. It also raises the emotional and moral problem whether surgeons who are desperate for a transplant for another patient will work to the best of their ability to save the life of a potential donor. There is also the question of xenotransplantation – the use of animals for transplantation and whether animals such as pigs, chimpanzee etc be bred to provide life-saving human organs.
The majority of Christians agree with transplant surgery and carry donor cards, but would object to rich people or surgeons in the developed world paying for organs from the poor. Their support for transplant surgery is based on their belief in the immortality of the sould, believing that the body is not needed after death and therefore its organs can be used to help the living. It is also reinforced by Jesus’ command of ‘loving thy neighbour’ and his golden rule, to ‘treat others as you wish to be treated’ which justify transplants and is regarded as a loving act.
Some Christians are opposed to transplant surgery using organs from the departed, but accept transplants donated by living relatives and would not allown such organs to be paid for. They believe that transplant organs from the dead into the living usurps the role of God, and humans do not have the right to act as God. They allow organs donated from the living because they are not vital, e.g you can survive with one kidney, an therefore can be used.
Then there is the minority of Christians who oppose all transplant surgery and will not carry a donor card because they believe that transplants can ignore the sanctity of life, and is usurping God’s role which is wrong. They also agree with all the non-religious arguments against transplants.
Most Muslims are opposed to transplant surgery but neither the Shari’ah nor the Qur’an allow nor forbid it, so there are many different opinions. There are three main principles. The Shari’ah teaches that nothing should be removed from the body after death, ‘to break the bone of a dead person is as sinful as to break the bone of a living person (adapted from the Hadith). The Qur’an says that God has created the body of a person, so to take parts from one body and put them together into another is to act as God (shirk) which is the greatest sin of Islam, and is a denial of trust. The Muslim sanctity of life means that all life belongs to God, and only God has the right to give and take life. Therefore Muslims following these ideas reject the idea of organ transplants. Such Muslims would also agree with non-religious arguments against transplants. On the other hand, there are Muslims who allow transplant surgery using organs from a living donor as long as the donor is a close relative. A ruling, fatusa, was issued by the Muslim Law council of the United Kingdom in 1995 saying that Muslim could carry donor cards and have transplants.
b) Only God has the right to interfere with our genes. Do you agree?
Genetic engineering is the deliberate modification of an organisms genes to produce a change in its characteristics an can be used to find cures for diseases. When we are conceived we inherit an equal number of genes from each of our parents, 23 pairs of chromosomes. They determine our physical appearance, personality and many other characteristics; however, the environment we have been nurtured in is also an important factor. Through these genes, we can also inherit genetic diseases such as cystic fibrosis and mental retardation. Because of this The Human Genome Project has tried to ‘map’ all the genes in the human body in order to manipulate them and eliminate the diseases. Stem cells are grown using cloning techniques and replace the defective genes. They are produced by used IVF embryos. The embryos are kept alive and are multiplied and then transplanted when needed. Stem cell research was only legalised in the UK in February 2001, however it is still illegal in the USA where it was a major issue in the 2004 presidential election.
It is now possible to clone, make an exact copy of, animals. The most well known is Dolly the sheep; she was the first to be created but died quite young in 2003. There is also speculation about cloning humans; the idea has been brought up throughout the media. Many people disagree with the idea of human cloning and find it repugnant. It is believed that human cloning could benefit mankind greatly, that someday it may be possible to reverse the aging process. However it raises issues such as whether the value of a life diminishes.
We can now choose the gender of our child and technology is being developed to be able to choose specific genes such as height, hair colour and intellect etc.
There are a lot of non-religious arguments for and against genetic engineering. “I not only think that we will tamper with Mother Nature, I think Mother wants us to.” - William Gaylin .It offers the cure of currently incurable diseases and is already available in other countries for those who are rich enough. It can be argued that genetic research is an integral part of medical research and is inevitably going to include some genetic engineering.
“Consider God’s handiwork; who can straighten what he hath made crooked?” -Ecclesiastes 7:13. On the other hand there is not enough information about the long-term effects, and I irreversible therefore any damages would be permanent. It offers the possibility of genetic screening which would prevent anyone ill or dying young acquiring life insurance or even a job.
In my opinion, I think genetic engineering is an extremely difficult subject. Although it has many advantages, such as it the elimination of genetic diseases, it also has many disadvantages such as providing an opportunity for racial supremacy which would evolve from genetic choice. I think that genetic research is inevitable, that mankind will always try to breach into the unknown and the seemingly ‘impossible’ to try and save lives, but how far does that morale obligation extends? However it raises the question whether a ‘perfect’ human being should be created, and whether we have the right to make the perfect human being. I think that genetic engineering could either: save lives as it was intended and help improve lives by making small changes OR crosses into the boundary of selfishness and create a supreme race and divide the world even more so than it is now, making human life meaningless.
Within Christianity there are again lots of different views. Catholics believe that Genetic Engineering should be investigated to cure diseases but the use of human embryos should not be allowed as they believe that it is murder and that life begins at conception. Liberal Protestants agree with Catholics but add that it should not be used to create perfect humans or clones, and support the use of embryos as they have potential for life but are not alive. However some Christians completely disagree with Genetic Engineering altogether and believe that God created our genetic make and that altering it would be playing God which is a sin. They also believe that earth shouldn’t be made perfect because heaven is perfect and that we should not try to create heaven on earth. Similarly Traditional Muslims are opposed to all genetic research because they believe that God made us the way we are and to alter that would be to act as God, which is the unforgivable sin of ‘shirk’. Shirk is the worst possible sin, and includes turning away from Islam, and playing God etc. In some countries it is worth the death penalty. They believe that embryo research is the same as abortion, and abortion is banned in Islam because it is seen as murder, and like Catholics they agree that life begins at conception. However unlike Traditional Muslims, Modern Muslims agree with Liberal Protestants and believe that genetic engineering is a good to cure diseases, but should not be used to create perfect human beings. They also support the use of embryos under 14 days because they are not human yet, and that teachings in the Qur’an and the Hadith say that Muslims should heal people.
There are many moral set backs and many beliefs whether it should be allowed or not, but there is no doubt that mankind has stumbled into a great discovery which has divided the nation, questioning the ability to alter our very existence.
Definition from http://www.medterms.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=3977z