Creating clones, kids & chimera: liberal democratic compromise at the crossroads.
The objective of this article is to find middle ground between the supporters and opponents of biotechnology by perpetuating the existing legal compromise pertaining to the complete range of health and welfare doctrines relevant to the biotechnological industry. The author aspires neither to add to nor detract from this liberal democratic consensus, but to preserve its constitutive balance between positivism and natural law and over-regulation and under-regulation in the hopes of stabilizing new political fault lines developing around the few biotechnological innovations already grabbing headlines. The most feasible solution is to extend the existing liberal democratic compromise with respect to equal protection, reproductive rights, the First Amendment, human subject experimentation, patent law, and parental rights. This includes banning or monopolizing certain biotechnologies and extending substantive special respect to the ex vivo living human embryo. Biotechnology must not be left to regulate itself.
Adams
Nathan A
NA
Florida Department of Education, Tallahassee, Florida, USA.
D001709:Biotechnology / Q000191:economics / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D002678:Chimera; D019976:Cloning, Organism / Q000941:ethics / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D005818:Genetic Engineering / Q000941:ethics / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D005820:Genetic Testing / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence; D033161:Government Regulation; D006805:Human Experimentation / Q000941:ethics / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence; D006806:Human Rights / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence; D006801:Humans; D010361:Patients / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence; D011057:Politics