Exactly How Should Christians Be Uneasy About Germ-line Genetic Engineering? A Response to David Jones
In his attempt to assess the evasive uneasiness associated with germ-line genetic engineering (GGE), David Jones turns his exploration of explicitly theological objections into a case for unconditional rejection: even intended curative instances would have an underlying ontological malice of identif...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
Oxford University Press
2012
|
| In: |
Christian bioethics
Year: 2012, Volume: 18, Issue: 2, Pages: 163-170 |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Parallel Edition: | Electronic
|
| Summary: | In his attempt to assess the evasive uneasiness associated with germ-line genetic engineering (GGE), David Jones turns his exploration of explicitly theological objections into a case for unconditional rejection: even intended curative instances would have an underlying ontological malice of identifying and bringing into existence those who are, as it were, unidentified and not planned by God for future existence. His argument raises the questions of how exactly is each of us “identified” by God, and whether any increase in abilities through GGE will eventually render humanity “unidentifiable” before Him as the species He created. This latter question points to the deeply rooted fear that due to germ-line interference we might one day completely and irreversibly lose the image (and our ability to pursue the likeness) of God. But surely, not all intervention in the human germ line can be accused of pursuing the goal of transforming humans into nonhumans. This essay argues that GGE does indeed offer benefits and pose risks, but these are properly assessed not in terms of issues concerning the identity of future persons but first and foremost in terms of the spiritual identity of those involved in the practice. It is not so much what the technology brings about in future humans that usually counts here, but who we become by engaging it in various ways. The main Christian concern should be to determine where GGE fits within the ascetic effort of becoming holy and within the struggle toward salvation. Sometimes the significance of such decisions will be sufficiently clear, but other instances will present a painful obscurity that requires particular spiritual discernment and guidance. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1744-4195 |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: Christian bioethics
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1093/cb/cbs020 |