Document Type
Article
Publication Date
1996
Abstract
Often the advancement of science is blamed for a loss of religious faith. Yet, there is a contrary belief that the work of science is a primary factor for causing a greater understanding of religious truths. The scientist and the theologian both depend on experience and interpretation. They simply ask different types of questions not expecting to receive the same types of answers in return. In point of fact, there is no actual conflict between a statement of theological principle and the scientific method of inquiry.
Two futuristic challenges to the freedom of scientific inquiry and the fear these challenges run counter to accepted moral and religious principles are examined in this Article: Specifically, that of cloning a human and the resuscitation of a “cryon” - or one undergoing cryonic or deep-freeze suspension upon death. The conclusion reached from this analysis is that the awesome powers of genetic creation and of biotechnological success must be executed with a rational and enlightened purpose and with a spirit of humanitarianism. Human suffering - both present and future - must be minimized whenever possible by contemporary science - often referred to as the “New Biology.” Accordingly, genetic advancements which contribute to the common or social good should be pursued and utilized without being labeled unethical, immoral, or in contravention of religious precepts.
Recommended Citation
George P. Smith, II, Pathways to Immortality in the New Millennium: Human Responsibility, Theological Direction, or Legal Mandate, 15 ST. LOUIS U. PUB. L. REV. 447 (1996).
