This Blog considers assisted suicide/euthanasia, bioethics, human cloning, biotechnology, radical environmentalism, and the dangers of animal rights/liberation. My views expressed here, as in my books and other writings, reflect my understanding that the philosophy of human exceptionalism is the bedrock of universal human rights. Or, to put it another way: human life matters. (The opinions expressed here are my own and not necessarily those of any organization with which I am affiliated.)
Amendment 2 Hurts Girls
An effective ad urging Missouri voters to "protect our daughters" from exploitation for their eggs by voting no to the human cloning legalizing Amendment 2.
posted by Wesley J. Smith @ 12:47 PM
4 Comments
I am a Senior Fellow in Human Rights and Bioethics at the Discovery Institute and the author of 12 books, including A Rat Is A Pig Is A Dog Is A Boy, which is relevant to the issues considered by this blog.
Subscribe to
Comments [Atom]
4 Comments:
I concede that therapeutic cloning probably won't lead to much practical results (given the numerical problem in egg harvesting), but I'm not bothered that it would lead to exploitation of the poor.
I don't see much difference morally between selling one's eggs and selling sperm, blood plasma, hair, or even being paid to be a research subject. I'll never know what it's like to donate eggs, but the other things we do accept do involve some pain, so I cannot accept the rationale that we should not allow egg selling on the ground it is painful.
Perhaps the real concern is setting a price for eggs. Surely, rich white woman would demand far more than a poor, inner-city minority, and that might seem unfair. But even still, I'm not bothered the principle of selling eggs.
Selling sperm constitutes virtually zero health risks. Selling blood plasma is odious to me, but unless done too often, there is little danger. Extracting eggs, on the other hand, is not risk free. It can kill in rare cases, cause sterility, lead to ovaries swelling to the size of a grapefruit, etc.
So, why would it be better if a woman donated her eggs to science, as opposed to be financially compensated?
I don't see the difference. If anything, it is better to be financially compensated as opposed to not. If one sells one's body for money or for some abstract notion of the advancement of science, it's the same to me.
If it is too painful, then maybe the price is too low.
But if what you're really going for is the ends do not justify the means (i.e., too painful for what ultimately may be achieved), then I might agree with you under that theory, but not under the principle that financial compensation is bad in itself.
Because only the poor will be selling. It could open the door to the exploitation of poor women, particularly should tens of thousands of eggs be required, and turn them into so many egg farms. See the Hands Off Our Ovaries WEB site.
With the potential consequences, you won't see many middle class and well off women "donating."
Right now there aren't enough eggs for cloning. So scientists are beginning to turn to animal eggs.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home