Image provided by: Texas A&M University
About The Battalion. (College Station, Tex.) 1893-current | View Entire Issue (Jan. 23, 1998)
The Battalion Opinion • January 23, 1998 TECH TALK Icctune <U L O ak angers of human replication warrant immediate ban Manisha Parekh columnist I he demise of Chicago in the Great Fire of 1871 was caused by Mrs. O’Malley’s □w. Will the demise of the hu- aan race be caused by Dolly leBheep? Dolly made headlines last ear as the first cloned animal i be successfully produced. ►oily is the exact replica of her lother, down to the DNA, be- ause she was produced by an mbryo created from one of her lother’s cells. Her birth has touched of a storm of questions bout the cloning of other animals; more specifi- ally, the questions are about human cloning. Physicist Richard Seed believes that there is no uestion: humans can be cloned, should be loned, will be cloned within the next few years. The real question, though, is not “Can we iplicate humans, but should we? Seed says, “Clones are going to be fun. I can’t r ait to make two or three of my own self.’’ Hello? Puppies are fun. Bunnies are fun. Playing od and toying with Jives of sentient human beings i not fun. ft is dangerous, risky and unethical. Proponents of human cloning claim that this breakthrough will allow couples, who otherwise could not, to have children. “It’s common now to see the dead parent father a baby through the process of frozen sperm implantation. Imagine the joy of a widow raising a child looking like her beloved deceased hus band,” says Dr. Brigitte Boisselier. The joy? Putting aside the fact that ar tificial insemination and hu man cloning are two separate and very different things (not to mention that frozen sperm im plantation is not common in any sense of the word), Bois- selier’s attitude typifies the problems with human cloning. It is hard to imagine the psycho logical problems that could occur for both parents and their cloned chil dren. Children already go through enough problems establishing a separate identity from their par ents. One can only wonder what will happen to the psyche of a child who knows that he is the exact copy of his parent. Furthermore, by allowing cloning, the di versity of the human species drops. Instead of introducing new DNA into a gene pool, the same DNA is used over and over again with the same defects and mu tations. There is a reason you can not marry your own cousin: in- breeding causes a greater inci dence of genetic faults. By allowing people to form other humans with the same DNA, we are opening ourselves up to the possibility of genetic suicide. Proponents of cloning also claim that clones will be a valuable source of spare parts for transplants and re search. One must ask what it says for the human race if we create a group of humans who will be raised solely for the purpose of being slaughtered. People say that slav ery is reprehensible; we must ask then what can be said about cloning. There was a large outcry several years ago when the Ayalas, a Californian couple, had a baby in the hopes that it would be able to donate marrow to their daughter, Marissa, who had cancer. At least the Ayalas were going to love and raise the child even if it wasn’t a compatible donor. Can that be said of those who will breed clones? Nineteen European nations signed an agree ment to ban human cloning on January 12, stating that it is “contrary to human dignity.” Two coun tries, Germany and Britain, were hesitant to give their approval. Germany felt that the agreement was too weak. They wanted something more stringent, along the lines of a German law which forbids all research of human embryos; the law was enacted in response to Nazi attempts to conduct genetic engineering experiments on humans. The Europeans have made their stand against human cloning. Now it is time for the United States to follow their lead and also impose a ban. If the human race is to keep its dignity and in tegrity, there is no question about it. Manisha Parekh is a sophomore psychology and journalism major. LONE STAR LOWDOWN Inmate’s newfound tedemption should not influence death sentence Frank Stanford columnist woman in Huntsville is sitting ill alone in a jail cell is; >n death row. She has )een sentenced to die by ethal injection on Feb. 3 eC or a heinous crime she ipenly admits commit- li ing. At about the time [an nost of us will be eating nt (inner on that Tuesday low tigl 11, Karla Faye Tucker vill be escorted to a little W oom with a medical-look- [? ng table in the middle. She will be strapped to that table while re- | >oners and a few others, chosen in an official ca pacity, look on. Shortly thereafter, a poison will be I ^jumped into her arms and for a few brief mo- nents she will feel death flowing over her body, (aria will die, and the state will have killed her. K)f Well... big deal. This is Texas. Texans do not art up with deadly criminals very much. Never iave. But, as a result of a television interview by arry King on CNN, over a thousand letters have poured in from Texas and across the country to Governor Bush, claiming that Karla is a special asc and should be spared. T You see, in addition to being a clean, attrac- ve. intelligent, well-mannered woman with nice 3eth and pretty hair, Karla is a born-again Chris- an who seems to have turned her life around in le last 10 years. j She was a bad girl who saw the light and be- ame good. But she was a very bad girl, indeed. In 1983, Karla and her boyfriend in an at- Jmpt to burglarize an apartment, savagely jCiurdered two people. Karla killed one of the Victims herself with 20 stabbings of a pick ax. A ... ick ax, mind you. Anyway, the homicide detective on the case aid it was the most brutal murder he had ever 3en, and the judge threw the book at both of le accused, sentencing them to death. In her interview with Larry King, Karla said the aurders occurred just as they have been publi- Tzed. She not only stated that under Texas law she lould be put to death, but that as a Christian she forgiven by God and is ready to die. £1* Of course, she would rather not die, and the rea- >n for being spared — like most of the letters sent > Austin have claimed — is that she is a complete- dilTe rent person. This is undoubtedly true, but is tis a reason to be spared the death sentence? ^ e [ In order to answer such a question we have to 2 certain the issues surrounding this case are early separated. 1 First, whether the death penalty should be le- (Jlnlis not relevant in this case. It is legal, and she iet the criteria overwhelmingly. Her being fe- iale shouldn’t be a factor because of obvious ^xist implications. Even though our culture generally finds killing women more disturbing than killing men, one might argue that due to strength considerations she had to put forth even more effort than a com parably sized man in order to sink the ax into her victim’s body so many times. That she has become a born-again Christian is equally irrelevant in that murder is a crime against the state, a state that doesn’t recognize preferential treatment based on religion. Her supernatural forgiveness may count in the spiritual realm, but she is still in the natural world, and the Texas Department of Corrections is hardly heaven. Unfortunately, the most legally irrelevant, al beit most socially relevant consideration in Kar la’s case is our own emotionality. Regardless of the facts, most people know how they would judge Karla based on how they generally feel about the death penalty, women, particularly at tractive articulate women, Christian values, born-again Christians, and whether the TDC is responsible for criminal deterrence, retribution or varying degrees of both. People’s emotions usually make these types of decisions for them. So, people are left with the fact that she is now just a good person, nothing else. But in order to be truly fair and impartial people must look at Karla as “Karl.” He’s a sweaty, hairy man with rot ting teeth, foul language, a swastika branded on his forehead and Mickey Mouse shooting the finger tattooed on his chest, who in his interview with Larry King was clearly dumb as a shoe. In 1983 Karl picked up an ax and blud geoned one of your relatives into a bloody mush just to rob her house. But, for the last 10 years on death row Karl has been a devout Bud dhist, writing children’s books about the impor tance of compassion, honoring one’s parents and hard work. All profits are given to cancer research, his favorite charity. Karl is a completely different person now and although he is ready to die for his crime, he is ask ing that he be spared based on his current merit. Both inmates have undergone major rehabili tative transformations, and would bring back their victims if they could. Both are sorry for what they did in the past. The only significant difference between the two criminals is how we feel about them based on factors that should remain irrelevant, particu larly in a legal setting. An attractive Christian woman and a brutish Buddhist man in Huntsville are sitting all alone in a jail cell on death row. Although the issue at hand is the life of Karla, not Karl, they are still the same life. Given the cir cumstances, it’s not important whether they live or die, only that they live or die together. Frank Stanford is a philosophy graduate student. if * v ■TexaSA&M Unre-er«l MAIL CALL Educational lows not feminists' fault In response to Donny Ferguson’s Jan. 22 column: Ferguson’s column is one of sev eral anti-feminist columns I have read in The Battalion since begin ning my studies at Texas A&M. Somehow, Ferguson believes that feminists are responsible for chil dren’s low test scores because text books replace words like “fireman” with “firefighter.” Fie claims that this “gender equi ty” is harming both male and female students and accuses feminists of trying to “sell their anti-male, anti- Western culture snake oil.” Yeah, that sounds reasonable. I grew up in California and at tended Mills College, a rather femi nist all-women’s college in North ern California. Moving to Texas was quite a cul ture shock, and I am always disap pointed when I read absurd re marks spoken with Rush Limbaugh propaganda that tout feminism as the cause of all of soci ety’s ills. A similar column last year stated that “women should not put their confidence in themselves but in Jesus Christ our lord.” Is every one on the planet a Christian? The same column also accused femi nists of using their sexuality to climb the corporate ladder. Oh, yeah, and it called femi nists “man-haters,” as well. Need I say more? Ferguson offers no evidence for his claim. Instead he resorts to pa thetic name calling and demon strates his woeful lack of knowl edge about the feminist movement in general. Feminists definitely are not manhaters, and they are not neces sarily women. Feminism is about equal re spect and opportunity for both genders, and if that means chang ing the occasional male-oriented word like fireman to firefighter, I do not see how that damages the intellect of boys. I do, however, see how using words like “fireman,” “policeman,” “weatherman,” etc. may damage the self-esteem of girls. When I was a kid, before I knew what a feminist was, I wondered why all these words were for men, and as I attended religious meet ings, I was told that women are sub ordinate to men. Yeah, well, if I had followed that I would not be studying biochemistry at Texas A&M, I would be home raising two children and cooking my husband’s dinner. Now, don’t get me wrong by saying I think “house work” is demeaning. I don’t. I just think women should be able to choose how to live their lives. If that means staying home or going to work, who cares? Ferguson’s “argumentum ad hominom” discussion makes him seem ignorant of and threatened by all feminists. Do not blame feminism for low ered test scores — blame poor pub lic schools, drug-ridden streets or lack of funding for education. You can also blame the media, video games and gangs. Blaming lan guage in a textbook that uses the term “firefighter” is absurd. Dawn Capp Graduate student The Battalion encourages letters to the ed itor. Letters must be 300 words or less and in clude the author’s name, class, and phone number. The opinion editor reserves the right to edit letters for length, style, and accuracy. Letters may be submitted in person at 013 Reed Mc Donald with a valid student ID. Letters may also be mailed to: The Battalion - Mail Call 013 Reed McDonald Texas A&M University College Station, TX 77843-1111 Campus Mail: 1111 Fax: (409) 845-2647 E-mail: batt@unix.tamu.edu For more details on letter policy, please call 845-3313 and direct your question to the opinion editor. spin WDE. n(0\) SfcEK, i iwHK smms DEVELOPING A C10KVN6 — PROGRAMS...