Charles Krauthammer is a Pulitzer Prize winning journalist with The Washington Post news paper. In a recent article he has raised some serious question about the stem cell research programme which has recently been approved by President Obama over turning a ban imposed by the former US president George Bush. Charles wrote, 'Given the protean power of embryonic manipulation and the human propensity for evil even in the pursuit of good, lines must be drawn'. The question of morality in this programme is definitely there but can we stop the forward march of science? From this basic moralistic standpoint can we definitely ask science to abide by any boundary? Chares opines, he does not believe that personhood is conferred upon conception. But he also does not believe that a human embryo is the moral equivalent of a hangnail and deserves no more respect than an appendix. The tendency and interest of science is always to unmask the less understood and science does not care about any moral drawing. The supreme mystery still is to find out if the creation of a human being is anything divine where no question can be asked and if an animal can be cloned why not a human being? This fearful possibility of a human being created without any biological conception is always attached to the stem cell research. Science has everything to say about what is possible. Science will never say what is permissible.
Akbar Hussain
Tell the whole story with photos, right from your Messenger window. Learn how!
__._,_.___