|
Events of the next few weeks will go a long way to determining how political opposition to embryonic stem cell research and therapeutic cloning will play out over the next few years. If the United Nations votes to ban therapeutic cloning, the present US administration is re-elected and the California Stem Cell Research and Cures Initiative is voted down at the ballot then we can look forward to a long fight for freedom in medical research - and delays in advancing medical technology that will cost the lives of tens of millions who could have been saved.
The UN discussion comes at the height of arguments about cloning in the run-up to the US presidential election. President George W. Bush opposes the creation of human embryos for medical research, but challenger John Kerry supports it, and the two have sparred publicly about their differences.
The impending election is adding fervour to both sides of the UN debate. Observers say that the United States is intensifying its lobbying for an all-out ban, because this reinforces President Bush's stance.
Those against a blanket ban may prefer to defer any decision in the face of the election, says Marc Pecsteen, a legal advisor at the Belgian mission to the UN. If John Kerry is elected on 2 November, the argument goes, he might switch the US position and their case could gain strength.
Those involved say that it is difficult to predict the outcome of next week's deliberations. Will the committee decide to ponder the case longer, or will it come to a vote? Many say that a decision is likely to be deferred, at least for a short period of discussion and consultation.
Even when popular support exists for a cause - such as stem cell research - the structure of highly regulated, expansive, invasive democracies means that years or decades can pass without significant change. If popular support doesn't exist, minority groups are blocked from moving ahead on their own. Significant change becomes a long, drawn out battle between vested interests rather than a purely local concern. This is a sad state to find outselves in: anything that slows technological progress also greatly reduces our chances of living to see significant extension of the healthy human life span.
|
|
Posted by Reason
|
|
|
|
