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...