Debate on New Biotechnology
In your Nov. 9 editorial on the subject of laws applicable to stem cell research, you suggest that “Congress should consult with people like Francis Collins, a devout Christian and director of human genetic research at the National Institutes of Health.†You suggest no other sources of sound advice for our lawmakers. Collins’ moral and professional credentials notwithstanding, your implication that only a “devout Christian†can provide guidance on genetic research worthy of congressional attention is offensive.
Citizens of many persuasions are grappling, publicly and privately, with the dilemmas presented by emerging capabilities that require reexamination of traditional definitions of both life and death. It will be a loss to our society if individual views have to be “qualified†on the basis of the religious affiliation of the holder. As you stated at the conclusion of the editorial, “More Americans need to enter the debate.†However, some Christians have asserted unique moral qualification for making public policy in our democracy and I am disappointed that The Times would imply the correctness of their assertion.
ROBERT SMITH
Manhattan Beach
*
Your editorial on potential risks and miracles from medical science will presumably comfort some of your readers and frighten others. They can all relax by remembering that, in the final analysis, Lazarus (John 11:1-44) died. It was probably just as well.
CHARLES GUNNERSON
Laguna Hills
