Special to Community Papers

An Open-Door Policy

Kentucky legislators invite a carte blanche approach to human cloning

by Walter Jones III, M.D.

Cloned human babies are on the way according to Dr. Severino Antinori, an Italian fertility specialist who intends to create the world’s first human clone. In fact, three women—two in Russia and one in an Islamic state—have reportedly already been impregnated through cloning techniques. But this information hasn’t impressed the U.S. Senate with any sense of urgency regarding the debate on embryonic stem cell research and human cloning in the United States.

After spending too much time discussing energy and trade legislation, too little time was left even to bring up cloning legislation before the Memorial Day congressional recess, according to Majority Leader Tom Daschle. Therefore, the fate of this critical legislation will again be delayed as the scientific manipulation of human life continues unchecked.

In Kentucky, House Bill 138, hailed by pro-life advocates as the most significant legislation in the state since Roe vs. Wade, was effectively killed by the Senate during the General Assembly, thereby inviting the potential for unrestrained human cloning in the commonwealth.

The bill, which would have banned all forms of human cloning, was debated after several amendments were proposed.  Amendment five, proposed by Sen. Tim Shaughnessy, D-Jefferson, was intended to encourage research at the Universities of Kentucky and Louisville, giving them freedom to operate under federal guidelines.  Although both universities said they did not support reproductive cloning (the creation of a human by bringing him or her to birth) they did support therapeutic cloning (the creation of human embryos for research purposes).  But since there are no federal guidelines for therapeutic cloning, the amended bill effectively would have banned all prohibitions against any form of cloning.  In essence the amendment gutted the original bill.   

House Majority Leader Dan Kelly, R-Washington, had initially called for the consideration of floor amendment one, which would have banned only therapeutic cloning. But Shaughnessy called for consideration of floor amendment five instead. After an emotional three-hour debate, the Senate voted 22-16 to amend the bill to allow for university research. But rather than allow the amended bill to return to the House, which supporters believed would have resulted in its defeat, a voice vote was taken which tabled the bill indefinitely. It will not be reconsidered during this session.

The implications of these events are significant.

First, there is unfortunately still debate over whether cells produced during therapeutic cloning constitute a human embryo. Sen. Bob Leeper, R-McCracken, argued that the product of somatic cell nuclear transfer—the procedure used for therapeutic cloning—neither uses nor results in cells having a human soul, which Leeper contends is one indicator of life. However, at issue is exactly when such cells possess biological life.

Second, therapeutic cloning now becomes legal in Kentucky. Amendment five was used to tie cloning prohibitions to “federal regulations.” However, federal regulations exist only for stem cell lines which have already been produced through in vitro fertilization efforts and are slated for destruction. No such regulations exist for therapeutic cloning.

Third, reproductive cloning also becomes permissible. UK and U of L have repeatedly refuted any desire to clone a human being while favoring therapeutic cloning for research purposes. Amendment one, if it had passed, would have at least banned reproductive cloning. The amending and tabling of HB 138 essentially removed all prohibitions on human cloning. Considering the current worldwide interest in this area, it seems likely that the practice of therapeutic cloning will inevitably lead to attempts at reproductive cloning.

Fourth, UK and U of L also have discussed their interest in research for treatments for cancer, diabetes, Parkinson’s, Alzheimer’s, heart disease, and brain and spinal cord injuries. The fact remains that not a single treatment of any human disease or injury has resulted from the use of embryonic stem cells or therapeutic cloning. On the other hand, research with adult stem cells—cells harvested from adult bone marrow or other organs--does not require the destruction of a living human embryo.  Such cells have resulted in treatments for each of the above conditions in either humans or animals.

Claiming to decide in favor of the benefits to life outside the womb, the people’s senators have chosen to ignore both the destruction of life inside the womb as well as safe and proven alternative treatments for human suffering. Science has told the commonwealth not only what can be done, but also what should be done.  But politics is stalling, and science is not. And if Dr. Antinori has his way, not only the “shoulds,” but the “should nots,” may increase in frightening ways in the next few months.