Stem Cell Research: A Christian Perspective

In April 2005, several scientists were touring the United States showing videos of the results of embryonic stem cell therapy in mice. The mice are shown with spinal cord injuries, barely able to even drag themselves across the floor, and then after being treated with embryonic stem cell therapy they are shown running around like crazy! Scientists are talking about using a similar therapy on humans with spinal cord injuries in the near future. In the United States the FDA must approve clinical trials with humans, and now that the "race is on" several scientists are vying for the opportunity to be the first to run clinicals using embryonic stem cells.¹

April 21, 2005 a bipartisan group of senators announced a new initiative to procure funding for embryonic stem cell research. They argue that embryonic stem cell research is going to happen whether we like it or not, and that it would be better to regulate it and to keep scientists in the country. Currently some scientists involved in stem cell research are considering relocating to countries that are more open to and supportive of embryonic stem cell research. Senator Orrin Hatch (R) of Utah, "who opposes abortion, says more and more of those on his side are moving his way as well. 'I have never believed that life begins in a Petri dish,' he said. Yet with embryonic stem cell research so promising for so many ailments, he added, 'one of the best ways to be pro-life is to help the living.'"²

Stem cells are fascinating cells and truly do hold potential for advances in medical practices and technology. Both adult stem cells and embryonic stem cells are valuable for research, the advantages of adult cells being that organs grown from them will match the patient and avoid rejection. The advantages of studying embryonic stem cells is that the signals which trigger differentiation during the early stages of life could be identified, they are more easily grown in culture and are always pluripotent - meaning that they have the potential to become any kind of cell. The disadvantage of using embryonic stem cells is the ethical question of "is it right to destroy embryos for the sake of research?"

The question behind this issue is not about the nature of the research, but about the moral status of embryos themselves. Are they people with full moral rights? What is personhood and when does it begin? Many opponents of stem cell research will claim that the Bible says life begins at conception, and therefore embryos have souls and are people waiting to be adopted into families. They claim that embryos should have the same status and you and I based on the fact that they have uniquely human DNA.

But nowhere in the Bible does it say that life begins at the moment of conception or that our personhood and standing before God hinges on this moment. There is no doubt that according to the text, God formed, and made us in the womb, and that he even knew us and called us by name before the moment of conception. There is no question that God loves each and every one of us so much that He sent His only Son to take our sins on the cross. But there is a question over whether an embryo should be treated as if it has full legal rights and responsibilities. There is a question over whether it is appropriate to use the terms of "adoption" in regard to embryos like we do for children. In fact there is evidence in Exodus 21:22 and in the rabbinic interpretations of the Biblical texts that suggests otherwise. They suggest that the unborn actually does not have the same standing as an adult in regards to personal status.

Those seated on the other side of the fence, the personalists, claim a strict definition of personhood which leaves out many members of society. Physicalists and personalists do not necessarily need to come to a full consensus regarding the definition of a person, but as both sides end up drawing arbitrary lines at opposite ends of the spectrum they need to admit the ambiguity of the issue in question and quit claiming to have the moral high ground. Walters offers an attractive alternative, proximate personhood based on intellectual potentiality, physical development, and social bonding. Even with these three factors people are not going to agree on a concrete definition of when personhood begins and ends, but we must admit that all of these factors are important and must be considered in life and death decisions, including those regarding embryos.

As the anti-cloning faction and the pro-stem cell research faction are gearing up for battle in Congress, we must know the issues at hand. Did you or someone you know vote based on moral issues in the last election? What makes an issue a moral issue? Unfortunately the Christian Coalition of America and other politicized evangelical and Catholic groups and not portraying the message of Christ's heart to the public.

It is not necessarily a bad thing to be concerned about abortion, or the status of embryos frozen in IVF clinics, but the impression that the church is giving to those who don't know Christ is that we are more concerned with politics and with trying to force people to leave sin behind by legislation that we have forgotten about the real actual persons in the world. This cartoon is asking, "Why do you care so much about and put so much effort into embryos when you don't care about your neighbor?"

If there is no condemnation found in Christ Jesus, and our attitudes should be like that of Jesus, who humble himself even to death on the cross, why is that the impression people are getting of evangelicals here in the states? Jesus said the greatest command is this, "Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength. The second is this: love your neighbor as yourself. There is no commandment greater than these." Mark 12:30-31

We are called to keep each other accountable in the church, but we can learn from the example of Jesus when he encountered the adulteress on trial. Is any one of us without sin? May he or she be the one to throw the first stone. We need to ask how we can spend our time, prayers, and energy radiating the love of Christ to our neighbors, be they next door or even all the way into Iraq or Palestine. God is a merciful God who desires that none should perish and that all should have eternal life, but he is also a just and holy God and will bring judgment on those who do not come to Him. How can they come to Him if the body is condemning them and turning them away?

I read through many pro-life articles and books in the course of writing a thesis on "The Issues Underlying the Stem Cell Debate", and they all shared the same tone. They were saying, "We are right. We need not explain our rationale for being right and we are prepared to debate with you in order to prove to you that your position is invalid." With this tone of superiority and pride, people are certainly not lining up to joint the physicalist camp.

The majority of students surveyed at the University of Massachusetts did not even consider human life to be special. If people consider dogs and gorillas to be more personlike than individuals with human DNA, they need to know that they are special and they are precious and honored in God's sight. They need to know this not only by our words, but by our willingness to listen, and by action. It's a shame that our faith has been hijacked by politics right out from under our noses. I don't believe it is a problem to have believers in government positions, I actually think we are called to be involved in all areas of public life. Go out into the world. But if our actions are turning people away from knowing Christ, something needs to be done about it.

As far as the government stance is concerned, the August 9th 2001 decision was a nice way to hurdle making an actual decision on the matter. It makes sense that if a large part of the constituency does not want to pay for research that destroys embryos then they should not have to do it, but drawing an arbitrary line with no justification at all does not make any sense. The government should simply either set aside money for stem cell research or not set aside money for stem cell research. If the government does not want to support embryonic stem cell research that should be clear and out in the open, not masked in a "compromise" that has no grounding other than political power play.

Looking at all the issues, we each need to decide our own positions regarding stem cell research in the light of God's word and his Holy Spirit. With the growing importance of moral issues in our society, we must ask ourselves what truly is a moral issue and what voting issues should be most important to us if we look at the world through the eyes of Christ and a knowledge of his heart.

Sources:

1) Philipkoski, Kristen. "Race to Human Stem Cell Trials is on." Wired News. 19 April 2005.

2) Royner, Julie. "Senators push fore more stem cell research." Reuters Health. 21 April 2005.

Further Reading by Heather Carreiro:

What are Stem Cells?

The Bush Administration and Stem Cell Research

End of Life: What Does it Mean to be Brain Dead?

Stem Cell Reseach & Abortion: When Does Life Begin?

Adult Stem Cells vs. Human Embryonic Stem Cells

Jewish Law Concering the Beginning of Life