| About this site |
| About us |
| Our beliefs |
| Your first visit? |
| Contact us |
| External links |
| Good books |
| Visitor essays |
| Our forum |
| New essays |
| Other site features |
| Buy a CD |
| Vital notes |
| Spiritual/ethics |
| Spirituality |
| Morality/ethics |
| Absolute truth |
| Peace/conflict |
| Attaining peace |
| Religious tolerance |
| Religious hatred |
| Religious conflict |
| Religious violence |
| Laws and news |
| Religious laws |
| Religious news |
|
|
 | 2001-APR-26: Ban of all cloning: Senator Sam Brownback (R-KS) introduced bill S. 790 to criminalize "all forms of cloning, including research cloning." The latter term is a synonym of the more commonly used term "therapeutic cloning." It notes that if therapeutic cloning were allowed, then there would be no way to prevent researchers from transferring pre-embryos into a woman's uterus in order to attempt reproductive cloning. The bill concludes that all forms of cloning must be criminalized. Fines would be in excess of one million dollars. It did not proceed. 1 | ||||||||||
| 2001-DEC-12: Ban of reproductive cloning: Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) and others introduced bill S. 1758 officially titled "A bill to prohibit human cloning while preserving important areas of medical research, including stem cell research." It would have banned reproductive cloning, but allowed therapeutic cloning to continue. It did not proceed. | ||||||||||
| Additional Senate bills during 2001 and 2002-JAN: Other bills
restricting cloning which did not proceed include:
| ||||||||||
| 2001-JAN-28: Ban of all cloning: Sen. Sam Brownback introduced bill S. 1899, titled: "Human Cloning Prohibition Act of 2001." It would have defined cloning as any somatic cell nuclear transfer, including procedures intended for either reproductive or therapeutic cloning. Penalties include up to ten years in jail and a fine of not less than one million dollars. | ||||||||||
| 2002-APR-9: Ambiguous bill: Sen. Byron Dorgan, (D-ND) introduced a bill S. 2076. It states: "It shall be unlawful for any person to engage in a human cloning procedure for the purpose of creating a cloned human being." The problem is that there is no consensus in the country about a definition of "human being." Some people argue that a just-fertilized ovum is a human person; other argue that a fetus becomes a human person only at birth. This technique of intentional vagueness is often seen in democratic legislatures. The introduce bills that are quite ambiguous so that they will receive a great deal of support. Then, they let the courts interpret what the bill actually means. Fortunately, the bill did not proceed. 2 | ||||||||||
| 2002-MAY-1: Ban of reproductive cloning:
Senator Arlen
Specter, (R-PA) introduced a bill S. 2439, called the "Human Cloning
Prohibition Act of 2002." It is titled: "A bill to prohibit
human [reproductive] cloning while preserving important areas of medical
research, including stem cell research." It would have simply prohibit the
implantation of cloned human embryos in
a woman's uterus. It would allow the creation of pre-embryos for the
development of human organs via therapeutic cloning. It would prohibit
the production of cloned newborns. If signed into law, it would be
similar to the laws and regulations in the UK and Canada. Douglas Johnson, legislative director of the National Right to Life Committee, said: "This bill would allow biotech labs to create as many cloned human embryos as they wish. Once they get the technical issues resolved, we believe they would create them by the hundreds of thousands, or the millions." That comments makes sense. If, for example, scientists could find a way of growing a human heart, then one embryo would have to be cloned and its stem cells removed in order to save a single patient's life. So too, for people whose kidneys have failed, and those who have a major breakdown in any other organ. The number of cloned embryos, and the number of lives saved, could both conceivably total millions each year. 3 | ||||||||||
| 2002-JUN-14: Debates on cloning bills delayed: Progress on the two main cloning bills before the Senate ground to a halt. One bill, sponsored by Senator Sam Brownback was the Human Cloning Prohibition Act of 2001 (S. 790). It would criminalize both reproductive and therapeutic cloning. The other bill, S. 2439 "Human Cloning Prohibition Act of 2002" would allow therapeutic cloning and ban reproductive cloning. Both bills were scheduled to be debated on JUN-14, However Senator Brownback would not agree to the order in which the bills would have been considered. He wanted his bill to be dealt with second. 4 Neither bill made it into law. | ||||||||||
| 2003-JAN-13: Senate bill for complete cloning ban stalled:
Senator Sam Brownback (R-KS) had decided to delay the re-introduction of
his bill in the Senate which would ban both reproductive cloning and
therapeutic cloning. He said: "We've pressed
hard quickly in the past, but we haven't gotten the Senate to move. What
we're trying to do this time is see if we can get broader consensus"
before introducing the bill. The Senate currently has 51 Republicans to 49
Democrats, and has procedures in place that make it virtually impossible
to pass legislation without 60 votes in favor.
| ||||||||||
| 2003-JAN-29: Ban all cloning:
Senator Sam Brownback (R-KS) introduced bill S. 245 into the Senate. It
would criminalize "all forms of cloning, including research
cloning." It is identical in wording to bill H.R. 534, which was later
passed by the House on 2003-FEB-27. The maximum sentence
would be ten years in prison. The fine would be at least $1 million dollars. According to Victoria Griffith of the Financial Times, "The
bill would place in jeopardy embryo research that uses cloning to mine
coveted stem cells in the hope of curing a wide range of diseases, from
Alzheimer's to diabetes."
The bill did not proceed. | ||||||||||
| 2003-FEB-5: Ban reproductive cloning:
Senator Orrin Hatch (UT) introduced bill S. 303, titled: "A
bill to prohibit human cloning and protect stem cell research."
It would allow "therapeutic use of cloning but bans reproductive cloning." 6
It would have prohibited:
The bill did not proceed. |
Federal House bills concerning therapeutic cloning:
| 2001-MAR-28: Ban of reproductive cloning: Rep. Brian Kerns (R-IN) introduced a bill H.R. 1260 "To prohibit the cloning of humans, and for other purposes." It's title was "Ban on Human Cloning Act." The bill would have prohibited "....any person from engaging in a human cloning procedure (the transfer of a nucleus of a human somatic cell into an egg cell from which the nucleus has been removed) with the intent of implanting the resulting cellular product into a uterus." The bill established criminal penalties. It did not proceed. | ||||||
| 2001-APR-3: Ban all funding of cloning research: Rep. Henry Brown (R-SC) introduced bill H.R. 1372 to ban all Federal funding of human cloning, both reproductive and therapeutic. It did not proceed. 14 | ||||||
| 2001-APR-26: Ban of reproductive cloning: Rep. Vernon Ehlers introduced bill H.R. 1608, the "Human Cloning Prohibition Act of 2001." It would have prohibited cloning unless the DNA source used in the procedure is modified so that the resultant pre-embryo "cannot develop to completion." The latter phrase appears to be ambiguous. The bill did not proceed. 7 | ||||||
| 2001-APR-26: Ban of all cloning: Rep. Dave Weldon (R-FL) introduced a second Human Cloning Prohibition Act of 2001. House subcommittee hearings were held. The bill was reclassified as H.R. 2505. 7 | ||||||
| 2001-JUN-14: Ban of reproductive cloning: Rep. James Greenwood, (R-PA) introduced H.R. 2172 "To amend the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act with respect to the cloning of humans, and for other purposes." 7 Its popular title is: the Cloning Prohibition Act of 2001. would ban cloning with the intent of initiating a pregnancy. However, it would allow therapeutic cloning -- the growing of organs to save people's lives by transplant. The bill was later rejected by the House on JUL-31 by a vote of 178 to 249. | ||||||
| 2001-JUL-16: Ban of all cloning: Representative Dave Weldon (R-FL) introduced
bill H.R. 2505. It would have prohibited human reproductive and
therapeutic cloning. It would have provided "that nothing in this
Act restricts areas of scientific research not specifically
prohibited above, including research in the use of nuclear transfer
or other cloning techniques to produce molecules, DNA, cells other
than human embryos, tissues, organs, plants, or animals other than
humans." 8 The House approved H.R. 2505 on 2001-JUL-31 by a vote of 265 to 162. By a vote of 249-178, the House rejected an amendment that would have allowed the limited creation of cloned embryos dedicated solely to research.
The Bill was referred to the Senate, but did not proceed. | ||||||
| Additional House bills during 2001: Other bills restricting
cloning which did not proceed include:
| ||||||
| 2003-JAN-8: Ban of all cloning: Rep. Dave Weldon,
(R-FL) reintroduced bill H.R. 2505 as H.R. 234, which became H.R. 534, the Human Cloning Prohibition Act of 2003.
The bill had 102 cosponsors.
The bill called for a sentence of up to ten years and a fine of one million dollars or more. 7 Tammy Baldwin (D-WI) proposed an amendment that would have permitted therapeutic cloning. She said: "If there is a possibility that therapeutic cloning could provide a cure that would save the lives of millions of patients who suffer ever day with terrible diseases, then we should do everything we can to encourage this research." Her amendment, and three others by Democrats, were rejected by the Committee. A vote was scheduled later in 2003-FEB. Even though hundreds of millions of people will be potentially affected by this bill -- those who suffer from diseases such as arthritis, Alzheimer's, diabetes, heart disease, Parkinson's, etc., -- no public hearings will be held. 9 | ||||||
| 2003-FEB-27: Ban of all cloning: By a vote of 241 to 155,
the U.S. House of Representatives passed bill H.R. 234. Part (b) of
the bill states that it would be "unlawful for any person or entity,
public or private, knowingly to import for any purpose an embryo produced by
human cloning or any product derived from such embryo."
If, as most researchers expect, therapeutic cloning leads to miracle cures
of Alzheimer's, arthritis, diabetes, Parkinson's, etc.
then this bill will also criminalize the importation of any medicines that have
been developed in other countries through the use of therapeutic cloning.
The bill is identical to Senate bill S. 245. |
State legislation:
| 2002-JAN-24: WI: Anti-cloning bills: The Wisconsin Catholic Conference and Wisconsin Right to Life sponsored a forum on cloning. They were promoting two bills, which are sponsored mainly by Republicans. One would make embryonic stem cell research felony with fines of up to $10,000 and prison time. Both bills were expected to pass the Republican-controlled Assembly and later stall in the Democratic-controlled Senate. According to CNSNews: "Both Republicans and Democrats have criticized the legislation, however, calling it devastating to Wisconsin's efforts at finding cures for diseases such as Alzheimer's and diabetes, and to the state's image as a worldwide leader in biotechnology." 13 | ||||
| 2002-MAR-23: FL: Anti-cloning bills not expected to pass: House Bill HB 805 and Senate Bill SB 1164 were not expected to be voted upon as the legislature concluded its session. They would have banned all human cloning, both reproductive and therapeutic. Cloning activity could have resulted in a 10-year jail sentence and a one million dollar fine. Kenneth Goodman, a University of Miami professor and co-director of the Florida Bioethics Network said that a ban "is like telling the Wright brothers they needed to rely on springs and rubber bands....We need to be sensitive to all sorts of constituencies. But scientists are looking for guidance, not a door slammed in their faces." 14 | ||||
| 2002-JUL-1: IA: Iowa becomes the sixth state to ban human reproductive cloning: Iowa joined California, Louisiana, Michigan, Rhode Island and Virginia by implementing a law banning human reproductive cloning. Pro-life supporters had attempted to ban both therapeutic and reproductive cloning, but had to compromise on a bill that only criminalized reproductive cloning in order to get the legislation passed. 16 | ||||
| 2003-JAN-29: TX: Texas anti-cloning bill: Bill SB 156 has been introduced in the Texas Senate. Its next step will be a review by a committee. | ||||
| 2003-FEB-20: KY: Bill to ban reproductive
cloning:
By a vote of 10 to 7, the House Judiciary Committee of
the Kentucky legislature approved House Bill 265 during the week of FEB-9.
It was sponsored by Representative Larry Clark (D-Ikolona). It would ban
reproductive cloning, but would allowed state universities to engage in
therapeutic cloning. The University of Louisville and the
University of Kentucky backed the bill. On FEB-19, House Bill 153, sponsored by Representative Joe Fischer, (R-Fort Thomas)
was defeated by a vote of 10 to 7. It would have banned both forms of cloning. Dr.
Walter A. Jones III, a policy analyst for The Family Foundation of
Kentucky, testified abpit Bill 265. He said that the therapeutic
cloning process still leads to creation of an embryo that, if implanted
into a womb, could grow into a human being. He said: "'It is still
cloning, no matter what the name is." Wendy Baldwin, vice president
for research at the University of Kentucky, said the technique offers
exciting opportunities for the treatment of debilitating conditions. "In
all my years, I have never seen an area of such promise."
11 Bill HB 265 was passed by the House on FEB-20. The sponsor of the bill, Representative Larry Clark, (D-Louisville), "dismissed comparisons between cultivated egg cells that change into specialized tissue, such as muscles or nerves, and human life. Egg cells in stem-cell research are not fertilized by sperm and would not become babies, Clark said. 'I would ask the opponents of this bill, does this group of cells grow an arm? A leg? A heart? A brain? Hands? Does it have a soul? Is it equal -- is it worth my life, or your life?' Clark asked." "In a two-hour debate that sometimes was emotional, but often dogmatic and repetitive, legislators hailed embryonic stem-cell research as a potential medical miracle and compared it to slavery and genocide. Scientists in the House gallery watched the 59-to-40 vote with University of Kentucky President Lee Todd and University of Louisville President Jim Ramsey." 12 | ||||
| 2003-MAR-30: KY: Bill to ban reproductive
cloning killed: According to John Cheves of the Herald-Leader: "The
[Kentucky] Senate voted 22-16 for an amendment that nullified the
controversial House Bill 138, a human cloning ban. The Senate then laid
the bill on the clerk's desk indefinitely, a move that stops the bill
for the rest of this legislative session." The bill would have
banned both reproductive and therapeutic cloning.
| ||||
| 2007-FEB-22: IA: Legislature eases restrictions on therapeutic cloning: The Iowa House narrowly approved a bill to ease restrictions on therapeutic cloning. The Senate had approved a similar bill during the previous week. Governor Chet Culver (D) will probably sign the bill into law. 17 |
References:
- "Human Cloning Prohibition Act of 2001," S. 790. Text is online at: http://thomas.loc.gov
- "Pros or cons? Senator Dorgan peddles phony cloning ban," Family Research Center news letter, 2002-MAY-14.
- Stuart Shepard, "Cloning supporters muddy the debate," Family News in Focus, at: http://www.family.org/cforum/
- David Brody, "Cloning Ban Vote Delayed, Perhaps Permanently," Family News in Focus, at: http://www.family.org/cforum/
- Alan Bjerga, "Brownback holds off on pushing cloning bill," Wichita Eagle, 2003-JAN-13, at: http://www.kansas.com/mld/
- Steve Mitchell, "Senator to introduce cloning ban bill," UPI, 2003-JAN-29, at: http://www.upi.com/
- More information on these bills from the 107th Congress (2001-2002) can be obtained from: http://thomas.loc.gov/bss/d107query.html Bills from the 108th Congress (2003-2004) can be found at: http://thomas.loc.gov/bss/d108query.html
- "H.R. 2505: Bill summary and status," at: http://thomas.loc.gov/
- David Brody, "Weldon Human Cloning Bill on Fast-Track," Focus on the Family, at: http://www.family.org/cforum/
- Kristen Philipkowski, "House votes to outlaw all cloning," wired News, 2003-FEB-28, at: http://www.wired.com/news/medtech/0,1286,57854,00.html
- Deborah Yetter, "House committee rejects measure to ban cloning," Courier-Journal, Louisville, KY, 2003-FEB-20. at: http://www.courier-journal.com/
- John Cheves, "Bill prohibits human [reproductive] cloning," Lexington Herald-Leader, 2003-FEB-21, at: http://www.kentucky.com/
- Joanne M. Haas, "Wisconsin Conservatives Push to Protect Embryos, Ban Cloning," CNS News, 2002-JAN-24, at: http://www.cnsnews.com/
- John Pain, "Cloning ban not likely to pass," The Associated Press, 2002-MAR-23, at: http://www.tallahassee.com/
- John Cheves, "Senate vote goes against cloning ban. Threat to research ends as bill dies for this session," Herald-Leader, 2002-MAR-30, at: http://www.aberdeennews.com/
- Lynn Okamoto, "Laws take effect Monday," DesMoines Register, 20020JUN-29, at: http://www.dmregister.com/
- "Iowa Legislature Sacrifices Embryos," CitizenLink, Focus on the Family, 2007-FEB-23, at: http://www.citizenlink.org/
Copyright © 2000 to 2007 by Ontario Consultants on Religious
Tolerance
Originally published: 2000-AUG-17
Last updated 2007-FEB-23
Author: B. A. Robinson
|
|
|
Page Translator: