1.1 September 8, 2019 8:29pm

References cited as of September 8, 2019

This is a follow-up on my earlier post: Degradation of human life proceeds: Human-animal hybrids in Japan and letter to MP

First, a clarification on the research in Japan that was previously banned and is now allowed:

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-02275-3

Hiromitsu Nakauchi, who leads teams at the University of Tokyo and Stanford University in California, plans to grow human cells in mouse and rat embryos and then transplant those embryos into surrogate animals. Nakauchi’s ultimate goal is to produce animals with organs made of human cells that can, eventually, be transplanted into people.

We should oppose the commodification and degradation of human life.

I feel that my letter to my Member of Parliament was a positive and constructive experience-as simple as it is. He addressed my concerns and questions. I recommend using this approach (using polite, formal communication) with officials of all kinds–government and corporate–on issues that are even more pressing–bearing in mind that the risk in expressing ourselves on some issues may be growing–but the idea is to make our society as livable as possible.

He confirmed that Japan did change their guidelines recently and allowed the “creation of human-animal embryos that can be transplanted into animals and brought to term.” He explained that this is banned in Canada, there have been no attempts to alter the legislation, and he would not support any change to the ban. The Assisted Human Reproduction Act (S.C. 2004, c. 2) prohibits the creation of human-animal hybrids (chimeras). See section 5(1) (i) and (j).

Here is section 5 and I am quoting everything because these points represent a focus on certain life-affirming values we should defend and not surrender. I don’t agree with every detail. And as far as animals are concerned, the animals could use the protection also! What kinds of suffering could other organisms experience because of these procedures?

Act current to 2019-06-20 and last amended on 2019-06-09.

Marginal note: Prohibited procedures

5 (1) No person shall knowingly

(a) create a human clone by using any technique, or transplant a human clone into a human being or into any non-human life form or artificial device;

(b) create an in vitro embryo for any purpose other than creating a human being or improving or providing instruction in assisted reproduction procedures;

(c) for the purpose of creating a human being, create an embryo from a cell or part of a cell taken from an embryo or foetus or transplant an embryo so created into a human being;

(d) maintain an embryo outside the body of a female person after the fourteenth day of its development following fertilization or creation, excluding any time during which its development has been suspended;

(e) for the purpose of creating a human being, perform any procedure or provide, prescribe or administer any thing that would ensure or increase the probability that an embryo will be of a particular sex, or that would identify the sex of an in vitro embryo, except to prevent, diagnose or treat a sex-linked disorder or disease;

(f) alter the genome of a cell of a human being or in vitro embryo such that the alteration is capable of being transmitted to descendants;

(g) transplant a sperm, ovum, embryo or foetus of a non-human life form into a human being;

(h) for the purpose of creating a human being, make use of any human reproductive material or an in vitro embryo that is or was transplanted into a non-human life form;

(i) create a chimera, or transplant a chimera into either a human being or a non-human life form; or

(j) create a hybrid for the purpose of reproduction, or transplant a hybrid into either a human being or a non-human life form.

(2) No person shall offer to do, or advertise the doing of, anything prohibited by this section.

(3) No person shall pay or offer to pay consideration to any person for doing anything prohibited by this section.

Note that human cloning and other procedures are also banned in Canada. The activity in other countries means that we need to be vigilant.

Potential follow-up research and writing:

1. What related research is currently going on in the United States and Britain as well as in Japan and other countries?

2. Analysis of the general contents of the Assisted Human Reproduction Act, including problems we might have with what it allows.

3. Past news stories about research involving chimeras and human-animal chimeras (including links in last post).

4. Possible issues with trade agreements. The new North American agreement could be examined.

5. Clarification about human life value–spiritual value vs. economic value. This is a fundamental distinction that no childhood family training or education should ignore–because we are failing to miss this with the decades of propaganda about moral relativism and other attacks on traditional moral systems. Some of our ideals about human free will were developed over thousands of years with conscientious intellectual effort that all becomes wasted. In the name of freedom of religion, the removal of religion has left a huge gap in basic reasoning and understanding about ideals we need in order to protect ourselves from evil: from slavery, cruelty and abusive exploitation of all kinds. People are deceived into calling degradation “freedom” or “progress.” The gap needs to be filled in–that’s what it is all about. Even the wording of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms explicitly relies on a reference to God–and lists values that were based on developments in thought by people of religion in the past (an earlier document was Diefenbaker’s Bill of Rights).

I feel that we need to rebuild something–whether it is called religion or not (probably not)–that is a “common core” of essential values that Christians and non-Christians can support without having to give up their specific metaphysical dogmas–a set of values that stands in opposition to elite, freemasonic, secular ideologies which hide behind claims of moral superiority and “progress.” I’m referring to the monetary system also. Not everyone will agree but I think enough people will agree to make a difference. Not everyone needs to live the same way but people should be free to teach what they value (what is of higher value, what is the ideal) and some of those values should be official and integrated (or re-integrated) with the law and other institutions in my opinion. There can be plenty of tolerance without exposing everyone to an onslaught of malevolent propaganda–which is what is happening. And I’ll conclude this by saying that we don’t need to think in terms of this happening in a “future” society that may never happen. We erect these values RIGHT NOW by taking a stand and speaking out and reinforcing whatever good already exists–in laws and attitudes.

5. Flaws in libertarian ideology–which are probably by design. I don’t know if my libertarian friends all understand this but I think that many of them do because many subscribe to traditional values. Libertarians refer to the non-aggression principle which means “do no harm”–or that the use of government force is only justified in self-defence. But when does that kick in–ever–when so many people are in denial of basic realities and ridiculing people for seeing the muck we are all swimming in?

Calling for bans and regulations (whether that effort is effective or not) is a good thing if the bans are about protecting human beings and society from damage. People do need to be protected from aggressive sources of exploitation that threaten our spiritual value, our mental and physical independence and survival (the G word is “genocide”), our ability to reproduce and the integrity of our genetic legacy. These things are threatened by subsidizing and giving sanction to the devaluing of human life–allowing the violation of boundaries that should be sacred.

We are all in this together–we are not isolated individuals. The individual needs protection and is often very weak (whether sick or not) in the face of these other economic and exploitative forces. Yes, this concept was how Christian communities got started in the first place. That was their strength. The individual represents everyone and the community is made up of individuals. The individual and community are both essential to being human.

6. Other areas to address: long and disturbing list.

---

---