For some these sentences betray the gravest hubris, oblivious to the greater hubris Montaigne makes reference to when he says: “Man is certainly stark mad; he cannot make a worm, and yet…[he makes] gods by [the] dozens.”  However transparent the manufacture of angels, souls, and immortality- these same confabulations remain at the forefront of our culture wars, rapaciously attempting to monopolize morality.

The very word “morality” has been so tainted by notions of purity, and a Big Brother voyeur in the sky, that I hesitate to employ any mention of it.  Morality reduced to unquestioning obedience as an unworthy worm, facing the test of a devil and a recording angel by one’s side- ceases to be morality, but rather servile neuroticism.

As we make advances in such fields as cloning, genetic testing, and genetic engineering- as in all technologies we develop- ethics should not be left behind.  The question is what set of ethics should be cultivated, and whether their sources should be those of a pre-scientific era, or a more utilitarian perspective based less on arbitrary taboos, and more on human need.
 
The knee-jerk reaction of mythic “morality” to some developments that challenge traditional or reactionary notions of “a human’s place” consists of a vehement insistence that we shouldn’t “play god.”  Actually, the insistence constitutes more than that, since there are few who are asking conscientious objectors to play god (save maybe when those theological beliefs endanger the lives of minors, e.g. refusals of blood transfusions).   Rather it consists of demands that those who don’t share the same view of the “sacred” be restrained by law or any other means available to satisfy the moral sureties of the pious.

To take one example of this phenomenon, beyond the obvious long-term hopes for biotechnology of curing or alleviating hereditary diseases (in which case it’s actually okay to play “doc”- some of the creator’s self-appointed public relations have informed us that he doesn’t get miffed by human copy-editing of his horrendous goofs), we have the more immediate dilemmas of being able to diagnose maladies of various degrees of severity from within the womb. This in turn poses the possibility the mother may choose to have an abortion.

Needless to say, those who generally assert that euthanasia and abortion (save maybe to save the life of the mother) are unconditionally immoral are going to launch propagandist salvos.   The trying decisions of parents will be likened to eugenics, drawing insidious parallels to Nazism.   Never mind, that if there were a “Supreme Eugenicist,” it would have to be the one who “created” in a large proportion of pregnancies the natural abortion of fetuses with birth defects  (“god”- the world’s oldest abortionist).

But in spite of the fervors that can jam both sides’ signals from reception, a hardy reason-based debate about a complicated issue certainly benefits all.  Not all hard-line “pro-life” arguments are invalid simply by virtue of their political purposes.  So it is in this particular instance.

There are reasons to question prenatal diagnoses- as in all medical tests there is the possibility of false positives.  There are reasons especially to discuss conditions that may primarily be cosmetic, holding out a possibility of a high quality of life.  But veneration of life with its incumbent suffering at all costs is a cruel mysticism indeed.

The Pro-life Guide on About.com has the following words of mysticism about a condition in which the decision to abort is far less murky:

“One of the most dreaded congenital problems, anencephaly is the absense [sic] of most of the brain. Fetuses with anencephaly often die in utero or during birth. Children born with anencephaly tend to live less than a week, although some may survive for months or even years…. Yet parents who have continued to term after a diagnosis of anencephaly have found meaning in their children's short lives. With the grief and confusion also comes a deeper sense of the mysteries of life and death.  It is typically assumed that the mother of a fetus with anencephaly will abort, since 98% of them choose to do so…. Those who have continued the pregnancy report bonding with their babies and taking joy in the time with them, even though the baby is in the womb and not in their arms.”

If there are “mysteries of life and death” that justify controlling the wombs of the less enlightened, I certainly hope they’d be the subjects of continual investigation, rather than subject to a dogmatic cover-up.
 
Where does the mystery lie?  In chromosome 8, gene 23x4r?  In the demonstrable fact that our personalities and cogitations are wholly intertwined with our nervous systems?  In this universe indifferent to our existence, un-sympathetic to the frail gears of our biology?   Perhaps the mystery just lies.

Contrary to the press reports, Prometheus didn’t steal fire from the gods; rather the mythic gods stole warmth from humanity.