Thursday, January 31, 2008

Pope defends right to speak out on bioethics

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22933625/
Benedict dismisses criticism that church blocks scientific progress
The Associated Press
updated 12:40 p.m. ET, Thurs., Jan. 31, 2008

VATICAN CITY - Pope Benedict XVI on Thursday defended the Vatican's right to speak out on bioethics, including its opposition to artificial procreation methods and embryonic stem cell research.

He also dismissed criticism that the Roman Catholic Church blocks scientific progress.

"Church teaching certainly cannot and must not weigh in on every novelty of science, but it has the task to reiterate the great values which are on the line and to propose to faithful and all men of good will ethical-moral principles and direction for new, important questions," Benedict said.

Benedict brushed off those who criticize the church "as if it were an obstacle to science and to humanity's true progress."

The pope singled out as "new problems" the freezing of embryos, selecting which embryos should be implanted after testing them for defects, research on embryonic stem cells and attempts at human cloning.

He decried them as proof that "the barrier protecting human dignity has been broken."

Benedict was addressing a meeting of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, a powerful Vatican office which safeguards doctrinal orthodoxy. He headed that office before being elected pope in 2005.

So should the church have a say in scientific/ethical issues such as bioethics? Are they any different than any other group using their collective might to enforce their will, for better or worse? Specifically, should a man who is seen as the spiritual leader of well over a billion people have more say than those who developed the technology? what about those who would benefit? And should an organization that has such a long history of animosity toward science be able to dictate the direction science can and cannot go in (especially considering that science has pretty much been right on every argument with religion it has had)? I am not opposed to Pope Being-a-Dick speaking his mind, but when one billion plus people think that you are god's appointed mouthpiece on Earth, you might have people siding with the man they think has a say in their fantasy destination in the great beyond rather than with considering the suffering of humanity that is real and where their contribution or voice could make a difference. Ugh... I just wish religion cared more about bettering the lives of living people than attempting to steer men and women towards the out-dated concepts of the first century. it just makes me sad.

7 comments:

Anonymous said...

While I think the Pope is a little out of date and his views are narrow, I guess I am little glad that there is a voice of criticism. Science, for all of its inherent good, should be checked once in a while. In my humble opinion, stem cell research should continue, but I would want someone to stand up and say human cloning is wrong (for instance) whether they are religious or secular humanists. But in general on this issue the Pope is not informed and his arguments are banal at best.

Beck said...

I think Reed pretty much covered all the bases here. Science for the sake of Science is great and all, but its methods and motives need to be scrutinized on a regular basis. After all, ethics and morality don't really fall within the influence of scientific endeavor.

It is, however, the realm of religion, philosophy, and spirituality... And I think it only makes sense that we use these tools to keep our scientific endeavors on the straight and narrow.

However, when religion impedes scientific progress or the spread of knowledge in an attempt to preserve outdated, dogmatic beliefs about the nature of the physical universe, then it has overstepped its bounds.

Pope said...

I see where both of you are coming from on this, but in general the scientific community does discuss these issues within its own community (and damn well should). In general, the ethics of those behind the science are usually well-intentioned, and they are often the first ones to talk about the implications and problems inherent in their research. I definitely think that the ethics of science are something to be discussed by everyone. My fear is the disproportionate influence of one man (or one community for that matter) on the subject. The fact that one man can wave his hand and over a billion people basically bow to his medieval will is scary, and that is assuming that at least 10% of Catholics ignore him - something like 1.15 billion on the Earth. I am not saying people shouldn't express their opinions, I am saying that the Pope does not deserve more influence than say a doctor, or researcher, or homeless man, in this matter - I hate the fact that just because he can "cancel you reservation in heaven" that he gets this unbalanced level of influence. I suppose I am just venting... and frightened by the prospect.

And btw, what's wrong with cloning?

Beck said...

Nothing, as long as you aren't cloning an entire human being. Right now, the problem with cloned animals is the fact that we haven't figured out a way to reset the "self destruct" timer in our cells.

Not being a cellular biologist, here's what I understand about the process in layman's terms: Our cells have a string of proteins(?) that help regulate normal functionality. When cells divide, this string of material is shortened... almost like a fuse, if you will. And after so long, this fuse in our cells becomes shorter and shorter, and our bodies begin deteriorate. It's been speculated that if we can find a way to stop this from occuring, we would theoretically never die of "old age".

Now, if we create a clone of a human being using material taken from another person that is 24 years of age, then the child would be born with cells that think they are 24 years old. That's 24 fewer years than that person is going to live.

Obviously, from a scientific and moral perspective, that is problematic.

Of course, we didn't need a Pope to tell us that. :P

Anonymous said...

I think you might give the Pope too much credit. Of Catholics that I know, only about half are practicing and about another 1/4 of those that do practice don't think they have to do what the Pope says in every circumstance. Now, that would still leave hundreds of millions of people bowing to the "medieval will", which is problematic. But let's not assume the Pope controls the wills of all Catholics. I guess, the larger is issue is one of religion vs. science. One that we are well aware of and have been for thousands of years.

Anonymous said...

That reminds me strangely of something I saw on Colbert. Ron Paul kills me. Here is the link:
http://www.comedycentral.com/shows/the_colbert_report/index.jhtml

Anonymous said...

Damn, the whole thing didn't copy. Here is take 2:

http://www.comedycentral.com/shows/
the_colbert_report/index.jhtml


Look for the report on Ron Paul from January 31.