Argues cloning ban 'silly,' scoffed
at those who find it morally repugnant
There is no moral concern regarding cloning human beings since human
embryos, which develop into a baby, are "only a handful of cells,"
argued President Obama's newly confirmed regulatory czar, Cass
Sunstein.
"If scientists will be using and cloning embryos only at a very early
stage when they are just a handful of cells (say, before they are four
days old), there is no good reason for a ban (on cloning)," wrote
Sunstein, who was confirmed by the Senate last week as administrator of
the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs.
"It is silly to think that 'potential' is enough for moral concern.
Sperm cells have 'potential' and (not to put too fine a point on it)
most people are not especially solicitous about them," Sunstein wrote
in a review of the 2003 book "Our Posthuman Future" by Francis
Fukuyama.
See the shocking investigative film documentary that MovieGuide says
"should bring an end to Planned Parenthood and the abortion industry."
Sunstein's comparison is not firm, however, as sperm cells, unlike
embryos, do not have the potential to develop into life on their own.
Sunstein, nevertheless, expounded on his attitude toward human cloning
in a 2002 paper for the Harvard Law Review, "Is there a constitutional
right to clone?"
WND obtained and reviewed Sunstein's 17-page article in which he
scoffed at those who find human cloning morally repugnant.
"Moral repugnance might well be a response to vaguely remembered
science fiction stories or horror movies, or to perceptions based on
ignorance and confusion (as in the idea that a clone is a complete
"copy" of the original, or a "copy" that is going to be evil)," he
wrote.
Sunstein eventually determined there is no constitutional right for
each citizen to clone themselves, but he seemed to argue for all states
to allow cloning. Currently, while federal regulations prohibit federal
funding for research into human cloning, there is no federal law
banning cloning. Some individual states imposed a ban.
Wrote Sunstein: "For some people, cloning might be the only feasible
way to produce a biological offspring. It would certainly not be
ludicrous to say that as a matter of constitutional law, the state has
to produce a strong justification for intruding on that choice in cases
in which it is the only realistic option."
In addition to Sunstein's moral disregard for human embryos, WND
reported last weekthe Obama czar several times has quoted approvingly
from an author who likened animals to slaves and argued an adult dog or
a horse is more rational than a human infant and should, therefore, be
granted similar rights.
A brief video on
YouTube
captures Sunstein at a 2002 event using the writings of Jeremy Bentham,
a 19th Century social reformer and animal-rights pioneer.
"You've heard a reference to Bentham, so let's listen to him, shall
we," he begins in the video.
He then quotes from Bentham's 1789 primer, "Introduction to Principals
of Morals and Legislation," written just after slaves had been freed by
the French but were still held captive in the British dominions:
"The day may come, when the rest of the animal creation may acquire
those rights which never could have been withholden from them but by
the hand of tyranny. The French have already discovered that the
blackness of the skin is no reason why a human being should be
abandoned without redress to the caprice of a tormentor," Sunstein
states, quoting Bentham.
Sunstein continues quoting the author: "A full-grown horse or dog, is
beyond comparison a more rational, as well as a more conversable
animal, than an infant of a day or a week or even a month, old. But
suppose the case were otherwise."
The rest of Bentham's sentence, not captured in the video,
continued, "what would it avail? The question is not, can they
(animals) reason or can they talk? But, can they suffer?"
While the YouTube
video
offers only a brief sound bite with no context, a WND review of
Sunstein's academic writings find he used the same verses from Bentham
to push for animal rights.
In the footnotes to a 2002 academic paper for Harvard University, "The
Rights of Animals: A Very Short Primer," Sunstein expresses his
approval of Bentham's arguments:
"I suggest that Bentham and Mill were not wrong to offer an analogy
between current uses of animals and human slavery," he wrote.
Several other works by Sunstein, including his books, quote approvingly
of Bentham's statements comparing adult dogs and horses to human
infants.
In the Harvard paper, Sunstein even suggests animals could be granted
the right to sue humans in court.
"We could even grant animals a right to bring suit without insisting
that animals are in some general sense 'persons,' or that they are not
property," he wrote.
The Senate last week confirmed Sunstein as Obama's administrator of the
White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs overcoming
months of delay due to Republican concerns that he would push a radical
animal-rights agenda.
The IFRL is the largest grassroots pro-life organization in
Illinois. A non-profit organization, that serves as the state
coordinating body for local pro-life chapters representing thousands of
Illinois citizens working to restore respect for all human life in our
society. The IFRL is composed of people of different political
persuasions, various faiths and diverse economic, social and ethnic
backgrounds. Since 1973 the Illinois Federation for Right to Life has
been working to end abortion and restore legal protection to those members of the
human family who are threatened by abortion, infanticide and euthanasia. Diverse though we are, we hold one common belief - that
every human being has an inalienable right to life that is precious and must be protected. IFRL is
dedicated to restoring the right to life to the unborn, and protection
for the disabled and the elderly.Click here to learn more about the IFRL.