This is a rather late plea to have you, those of you who are Missouri voters that is, consider voting “No” on Amendment 2 tomorrow. There are several compelling reasons to do so:
1) First the ethical ones. In a previous post on this blog I have decried the problem of the large number of frozen embryos in this country, partly due to indifference by the church. This amendment is not concerned with those embryos, but is about the more promising use of embryos created through Somatic Cell Nuclear Transfer. I say “more promising” because a significant hurdle is overcome through this procedure. The embryo that is created is an exact genetic clone of the person who donated the nucleus i.e. the stem cells derived from this procedure, which would then be used in therapies, would not be viewed as foreign cells and consequently not rejected by the recipient of the therapy.
Some would say that such embryos, not produced by the union of an egg and sperm, are not human in the same way as all those frozen embryos (even though those too are being eagerly sought for research). However, by the terms of the proposed amendment itself, this embryo is a human organism at an early stage of its lifecycle. That is why the amendment is at pains to insist that such embryos must be destroyed after 14 days, that they must not be implanted into uterii.
Admittedly, I do not know if it is currently the case that such embryos can simply be implanted and, Presto, there develops a normal human. Yet, despite sucesss or failure in this endeavor, which almost everyone is agreed should never be attempted, the natural course this embryo heads toward is the formation of a human fetus, if even only a malformed or weak one. This, I believe, highlights the fact that such embryos are not markedly different from the frozen ones left over from fertility treatments. Instead, chillingly, they are the results of attempts to recreate that natural process using the mechanisms and materials that nature itself uses, to specifically create genetically identical embryos. More chillingly, these embryos are created only to be destroyed to benefit others.
Incidentally, I think the process by which Dolly the sheep was cloned is helpful in understanding this issue. Amendment 2 supporters want to protect not the right to clone a human individual that would be fully developed, but only one that would reach the blastocyst stage so that his or her cells (yes, the embryo would be gendered…each of its cells woub be either XX’s or XY’s) might be used to establish stem cell lines.
2) SCNT is not currently illegal in Missouri. This amendment is designed to ensure that it might never become so. It is worth considering that for an Amendment to be made to the Missouri constitution only 50% of the populace must agree to it (a ridiculously low threshold in my opinion), but it takes 66% of the population to overturn it. So, if this Amendment passes, its effects will likely be long lasting.
3) There is some concern that this Amendment might create a demand that may lead to the exploitation of some women. This issue is significant enough that a coalition of “pro-choice” and “pro-life” [quotations theirs, which is interesting in and of itself because they are allowing the self-designated names for each of these camps to be used] have joined together to form Hands Off Our Ovaries and have a issued a manifesto.