Genetic Engineering
Gene technology, the call to care and “playing God”. If the church had the ability to cure every disease, remove all disabilities, and eradicate a multitude of suffering from the world, should it? With recent medical advancements, this may be a question Christians face sooner rather than later. The progression of genetic technologies has given rise to many ethical questions. The main focus of this essay will be those questions surrounding the tension between potential benefits of such technology and the slippery slope that could lead to marginalization and eugenics. The church does not have direct power over legislation in the twenty-first century, but both church leaders and individuals must be prepared with an answer and a ready response to the moral issues facing the world today. Should they support this gift of healing or stand up against its potential for destruction? While genetic alteration offers transformative possibilities, its use must be critically examined to avoid overlooking the dignity of individuals who live with disabilities, diseases and differences. It must be viewed through the lens of Christian ethics, which emphasizes the inherent value of life created in God’s image. As well as the concept of God’s sovereignty, comfort, and edifying power in the midst of suffering.
“Gene splicing refers to the removal or alteration of specific DNA segments, allowing for precise genetic modifications to enhance or restore functionality". It is used to treat conditions such as sickle cell anemia and cystic fibrosis, having the potential to treat cancers and acquired disorders. They can be carried out on adults, but it is much more effective and sometimes necessary to use gene therapy on children in utero. This can lead to a concept called “designer babies”: the practice of selecting very specific and usually aesthetic traits for embryos. This raises the questions of enhancement versus therapeutic use of genetic technologies, and some huge moral dilemmas concerning what is a “desirable” trait? One of the outstanding distinctions that these innovations force us to make is, “which disabilities, diseases, divergences and disorders do we wish to ‘cure’?”and “Which do we consider (although difficult) an asset to either the person or society in some shape or form?”
For the christian, when facing any moral evaluation, there can and should be one primary source to which they must appeal: The Word of God. When discussing matters of human life, it would not only be wise to, but we must consult with the author and sustainer of humanity and of life itself. In Genesis 1:27, God reveals that Human beings are made in the image of God himself. In this, we have intrinsic value and human life is sacred (Psalm 139:13). However, human beings are also made in the image of Adam. J Wyatt says that “DNA is the physical means by which God has enabled Adam’s likeness to be passed faithfully on to each generation,” and that this inheritance of Adam’s image is passed on at the moment of fertilization. Although different conclusions can be drawn about the meanings and implications of our “oneness” with Adam, it is safe to say that our DNA is important and is certainly linked or perhaps even bound with our humanity. These core principles laid out at the very beginning of the Bible undoubtedly affirm the dignity and value of those with disabilities as they are image bearers, regardless of their differences. Jesus, in his ministry, particularly focused on the marginalized and the vulnerable, preaching love for one’s neighbour (Matt 22:39). Kingdom Ethics expands on this: “For Christians, love is the heart of living, of being human.” Therefore, a follower of Christ must ask themselves, “How can I love my fellow human beings and image bearing neighbours?” In Genesis 1:28, God commands Adam and Eve not only to multiply, but to subdue. This is an incredibly important detail as it forces the Christian to consider not only their dominion over creation, but their stewardship; to care for the weak and disadvantaged, but also to alleviate suffering. However, at what point are we playing God or altering his design?
Gene therapy can transform lives, treating previously untreatable diseases. It has been used for conditions such as sickle cell disease and transfusion-dependent β-thalassemia. Severe genetic disorders caused by mutations, that lead to debilitating symptoms as well as reduced life expectancy. Regardless of your ethical position, there is no denying that these life saving (and life enriching) treatments can be both highly effective and practiced out of compassion and care for the weak or oppressed, which is a principle laid out in scripture (Psalm 82:3). Jesus healed a woman that suffered with a haemorrhage for twelve years (Luke 8:43–48). She would have been somewhat outcast from society due to being ceremonially unclean (Leviticus 15:25–27). Jesus not only healed her physically but from the societal hurt and exclusion she suffered from. Similarly in today’s world, disabilities, neurodivergence, etc., can exclude people and bar them from certain spaces and activities. If these technologies advance and gene mutations such as trisomy 21 (down syndrome) could be “fixed”. It would not only reduce suffering but would allow those individuals to do things that would otherwise have been difficult or impossible e.g sports, university, social inclusion, etc. In this way, gene therapy can be used in a Christ-like way, to heal and include the marginalized and disadvantaged, allowing them to participate more fully within their communities. But where does one draw the line? What point does a healer become a eugenicist? in 2018 doctor He Jiankui used germline editing to make twin embryos resistant to HIV. The treatment sparked global criticism as an unethical form of genetic enhancement that could open the door to eugenics-driven practices, including selecting for “optimal” traits or creating "designer babies." Idolizing perfection in a fallen world is not only impossible but will only lead to discontentment, pride, marginalization and maybe even worse. Pain, suffering, genetic imperfection, are all products of the fall, punishments for Adam and Eve’s sin (Gen 3:16-19). Not only could genetic selectivity cause social issues (such as a divide between “genetically enhanced” and “natural” people, or negative connotations surrounding those with disabilities), it undermines God’s Lordship, and his sovereignty in his purposes and plans. God is not only sovereign over perfect, pre-fall creation, but also over death and disease. He shapes us through suffering and uses hardship to lead us to humility and draw us to himself in dependency and thankfulness, we need not look any further than the life of Job to prove so. Scott Rae in his book Moral Choices states that “because human beings are made in God’s image, they have an intrinsically esteemed status as God’s earthly representative, regardless of their ability to function.” The worth of a human being is rooted in who God says they are, not what they bring to society instrumentally or how they benefit others. In order to select desirable traits and deselect undesirable traits when genetically altering an embryo, one must first decide which traits fall into which category. Attempting this, it seems essentially impossible to both reach a consensus and avoid reinforcing societal biases against disability. Many people identify so strongly with their disability that they see it as who they are, therefore to brand their condition as undesirable is to market that entire person as undesirable, which is entirely contrary to how God tells us to view one another. In fact, the scriptures call us to view others as better than ourselves not worse (Phil 2:3).
As Christians grapple with the promise and peril of genetic intervention, they must consider the needs of others and the gifts we have been blessed with to help them. As well as the limits to our dominion, the dignity God has bestowed on humanity, and acceptance of God’s sovereignty over blessing and suffering, appreciating the value that each holds for our sanctification and edification. The life changing capabilities must be critically analyzed alongside the potential threats of marginalism and eugenics. Although this essay began with a question of “if” the church had power over these things - what should its response be? There is a sense in which they do have the power. They have the power of their voices, to speak up for what is right, and God honouring. They have the power of influence, from the Christians in places of legal or medical authority. But most importantly they have the power of prayer. Christians can and must appeal to the all powerful Lord of all the earth. Who is sovereign over suffering and loving in his grace for sinners living in an imperfect world. These questions are becoming less and less hypothetical and the church must be ready to defend Christ and honour his commands in their response. "But in your hearts revere Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect" (1 Peter 3:15)
This was originally written as an ethics assignment for the Union Theological College.
Bibliography
Crombleholme, Timothy M., et al. “Placental Gene Therapy for Fetal Growth Restriction and Preeclampsia: Preclinical Studies and Prospects for Clinical Application.” Journal of Clinical Medicine 13, no. 18 (2024): 5647.
Cyranoski, David. “The CRISPR-Baby Scandal: What’s Next for Human Gene-Editing.” Nature 566, no. 7745 (2019): 440–442
Frangoul, Haydar, et al. “CRISPR-Cas9 Gene Editing for Sickle Cell Disease and β-Thalassemia.” New England Journal of Medicine 384, no. 3 (2021): 252–260.
Frontiers in Genetics. "Mechanisms of Gene Splicing and Its Applications in Disease Treatment." Frontiers in Genetics. Accessed November 28, 2024.
Kaul, Rauf-ur-Rashid, et al. "Unraveling Down Syndrome: From Genetic Anomaly to Artificial Intelligence-Enhanced Diagnosis." Biomedicines 11, no. 12 (2023): 3284.
Mulligan, R. C. “The Basic Science of Gene Therapy.” Science 260, no. 5110 (1993)
Rae, Scott B. Moral Choices: An Introduction to Ethics. 4th ed. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2018.
Sherkow, Jacob S., and Henry T. Greely. “CRISPR, Patents, and the Public Health.” Nature Biotechnology 33, no. 3 (2015): 256–262.
Stassen, Glen H., and David P. Gushee. Kingdom Ethics: Following Jesus in Contemporary Context. 2nd ed. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2016.
Steynberg, Rebecca. “Designer Babies: Evaluating the Ethics of Human Gene Editing.” Women Leading Change: Case Studies on Women, Gender, and Feminism 7, no. 1 (2023).
VanDrunen, David. Bioethics and the Christian Life: A Guide to Making Difficult Decisions. Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2009.
Wyatt, John. Matters of Life and Death: Human Dilemmas in the Light of the Christian Faith. Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2009.
