 |
|
|
Human Cloning Pioneer-Activist |
|
Compiled by GayToday
The media-savvy human cloning advocate, who was recently pictured in Wired Magazine and TIME, will use this occasion before the U.S. Congress, in part, to denounce a recently founded religious group, the Raelians, who are offering, reportedly for a fee, to clone children for gay male couples. Wicker summarized his forthcoming testimony:
Testimony by Randolfe H. Wicker: Randolfe H.Wicker Founder, Clone Rights United Front Director, Human Cloning Foundation Wednesday, March 28,200l Thank you for inviting me to testify today. This hearing is being held because everyone knows that human cloning is going to happen. As Dr. Zavos points out: “The Genie is out of the bottle”. As a human cloning activist during the past four years, I have viewed with alarm the growing public hysteria surrounding this issue. The general public is both highly opinionated and totally misinformed regarding human cloning. Cloning technology is a scientific achievement as significant as the conquering of smallpox, although less important than the discovery of the printing press. Cloning technology has achieved monumental importance due to its central role in stem cell research.
Wicker's cloning activism has been featured in publications around the world, like this newspaper in Japan
Despite all the hand-wringing and declarations against the cloning of human beings by biotech companies, stem cell research cannot be separated from human cloning. The same technology, inserting a cell into an enucleated egg, is central to both. The only difference between the two is that, in stem cell research, a tiny embryo no larger than the dot at the end of this sentence is killed through transforming it into a stem cell culture. In human cloning, the same embryo would be implanted into a woman's womb and allowed to develop into a wanted and loved child. The general public supports stem cell research because it promises to revolutionize medicine. The same public opposes human cloning, which itself is simply a medical cure for the human disability called infertility. The FDA has issued invalid legally unenforceable politically popular feel-good regulations forbidding human cloning in American fertility clinics. Mark Eibert will elaborate on this later. The Government that governs best governs least. The first and most central issue raised by human cloning involves each individual citizen's reproductive rights. The decision by individual citizens about having children and their manner of conception has always been a decision made by a patient in consultation with her or his doctor. Politicians in Washington and politicians in state capitols have no business deciding for American citizens who can bear children and how they can have them. The second critical issue raised by human cloning involves each individual citizen's right to religious belief and practice. I testified to the U. S. House of Representatives Committee on Commerce, Subcommittee on Health and Environment, on Thursday, February 12, 1998. I would like to quote a short part of that testimony before tackling the difficult situation currently facing us.
“…Religiously based restrictions…have no place in the law. They violate religious freedom. Those who believe cloning offers a partial temporary immortality have the right to secure an extended life for their genotype...human cloning does change, at least slightly, the traditionally clear line between life and death. “If, even after death, a later born identical twin can be born carrying the originator's genotype into another life, doesn't that somehow deny death its traditional totality? [An appropriate phrase might be, “ Right To Life equals Right to Clone.”] “Already, a Montreal-based group, the Raelians— with which I have no association whatsoever, I might say—are virtually preaching eternal or extended life through cloning. They offer to clone you for $200,000 at their Bahamanian facility, which we have found out doesn't really exist.” (See page 111 of February 12, 1998, Testimony to the Subcommittee.) I am submitting to this committee a copy of a press release and invitation sent to me on October 8, 2000 by Nadine Gary on behalf of CLONAID, “The First Human Cloning Company,” entitled “HUMAN CLONING WILL ALLOW GAY COUPLES TO HAVE CHILDREN,” I ask that it be included in the official printed record. (See Attachment 1) I am also submitting the opening few paragraphs of an article I wrote and which was published in GayToday, that gives context and perspective to the CLONAID press release with the same name. gaytoday.badpuppy.com/garchive/tech/102300te.htm (See Attachment 2) I am also submitting two other articles filled with valuable information. The first is an editorial from www.clonerights.com entitled “Religious Group Hijacks Human Cloning Movement,” January 8, 2001. (See attachment 3) (The second is one of many items sent to me to be shared with the press. It is titled “A Christian's Letter to CLONAID.” (See Attachment 4)
Virtually all media, with the exception of Wired Magazine's exceptional cover story by Brian Alexander (February 2001), have ignored the outrageous hype and attempted fraud perpetuated by the Raelian Movement. Apparently, you can get away with almost anything in the United States if you just do it in the name of religion and called yourself a faith-based enterprise.
Freedom of speech does not give anyone the right to falsely scream “Fire!” in a crowded theater. Freedom of religion does not give anyone the right to commit fraud. There is no need for new legislation or regulation on either reproductive freedom or religious belief. There is only a need to prosecute “fraud” whenever it occurs regardless of the person or group perpetrating it. Finally, the last critical question raised by human cloning technology revolves around “who” should control and regulate it or whether control and regulation are even possible. It is nearly impossible to draft legislation to outlaw reproductive cloning without harming medical and scientific research in the process. It is mind-boggling that most major media equate declarations by a group of space-cadet wackos about their “secret lab” where they are claiming that they are actually cloning a human being to the professional, responsible, cautious attempt to perfect cloning technology by two of the world's most renowned and experienced fertility doctors. This is like comparing “moon rocks” to polished Earthly diamonds. Drs. Zavos and Antinori speak in terms of “perfecting techniques,” which will make human cloning safe and viable. During a personal meeting less than a week ago, Dr. Zavos pointed out to me that he was “not selling anything”—compared to the Raelains who tell the media that “he who pays the most gets cloned first.” Dr. Zavos' services are not for sale. I believe that he is as he appears to be—a dedicated warm human being seeking to perfect a narrowly-focused therapy for disabled infertile couples so that they might have children genetically related to themselves. For instance, I would not qualify under Dr. Zavos' and Dr. Antinori's criteria. They have set “narrow limits” and “strict guidelines” regarding their goals. I would suggest that those interested read a leaflet about the 62-year-old woman who had a healthy child with Dr. Antinori's help, which I will not submit as testimony unless requested by the Committee. The “sound bite” for today is “Cloning is Dangerous Because Animal Experiments Have Shown It to be So.” I would suggest that journalists read carefully the detailed screening procedures that will be undertaken before human cloning is even attempted by this professional international consortium. I see a line-up of witnesses ready to testify to this committee. We have Arthur Caplan, whose voice has so crowded out other voices within bioethics that he is recognized as an American secular Pope. In Time Magazine, he said, “The short answer to the cloning question is that anybody who clones somebody today should be arrested.” Dr. Zavos and I have decided to “depose” this self-anointed secular Pope by refusing to debate him. See our leaflet “Let Other Bioethicists Be Heard,” which this Committee may include in its publication if it so chooses. How does one engage in civilized discourse with a man who begins the debate declaring that you should “be arrested”? This “moral authority” who would have us arrested was the first ethicist sued because of his involvement in the unnecessary death of Tucson teenager Jesse Gelsinger. I would suggest that HE should be the one “arrested.” This is a man who has contributed to the death of a healthy young American citizen. I object to his being allowed to testify to this committee. His “morality” has been the subject of legal action. I also see that you have another anti-cloning witness, Rudolf Jaenisch, from MIT. I listened carefully to this man's arguments on The Charlie Rose Show. Basically, he argued that Dolly, the sheep conceived through cloning, might be “mentally retarded and/or schizophrenic.” I would appreciate Rudolf Jaenisch supplying me with an “intelligence test” or a psychological screening test to see if an apparently normal sheep is or is not schizophrenic.
Now, we face the great issue of animal deformities that resulted from animal experiments. This is the “big issue” this week. Well, to begin, let us say “two year old cloning technology and/or studies are equivalent to ten year old computer technology.” Adults come to this issue (and I might well be one of them) with emotionally-based biases around which they construct intellectual defenses. I would ask any thinking person to consider the facts: the international consortium is working to “perfect” human cloning technology. Indeed, because it is taking a cautious professional approach, it might well be faced with disastrous results from those “crazies” seeking money, fame and glory for their “prophet.” I would point to an extraordinary situation in Brazil (Economist, July 22, 2000) in which science funding is insulated from the whims of politicians and the general public's hysteria. Shouldn't this be the model for the United States of America? I respectfully submit this testimony to this committee and hope that the information contained in it helps shape constructive political and social policy for the new Millennium. Cloningly yours, Randolfe H. Wicker Founder, Clone Rights United Front, www.clonerights.com Director, Human Cloning Foundation, www.humancloning.org Attachment 1 Press release from CLONAID October 9th, 2000 INVITATION TO RAEL'S PRESS CONFERENCE, FOUNDER OF CLONAID – THE FIRST HUMAN CLONING COMPANY RE: HUMAN CLONING WILL ALLOW GAY COUPLES TO HAVE CHILDREN
For any additional information or an interview with Rael, please contact Nadine Gary 702-497-9186 publicrelations@clonaid.com www.rael.org/press Attachment 2 Clone Rights United Front www.clonerights.com Reprinted from GayToday gaytoday.badpuppy.com/garchive/tech/102300te.htm Can Male Couples Create Offspring? By Randolfe Wicker With much fanfare Reuters announced on Monday, September 25, 2000, that 'Male Couples Could Conceive Child'. Calum MacKellar, a lecturer in bioethics and biochemistry at Edinburgh University, described a method in which chromosomes from a sperm could be inserted into an enucleated woman's egg to create “a sort of male egg”. This egg could then be fertilized with the sperm of another male, placed in a surrogate mother and the resulting child would thereby have two male parents. Can male couples like the one featured here on the cover of Hero magazine ever hope to have children of both of their genetic codes? “It's not yet possible,” Mackellar elaborated in a BBC radio interview, “and I am sure it's going to take quite a few years before it is possible.” To the knowledgeable, this vision of the future might best be compared to John F.. Kennedy's declaration in 1960 that “within this decade, we will land a human being on the moon.” A huge problem lay between the dream of male couples being able to have children and its realization. Unlike simple human cloning which would allow two lesbians or even a single woman to bear a child conceived through cloning, the child of an all male couple would have to overcome a major
One of the interesting things about both the gay community and the gay press is how only a few comprehend heterosexual reproduction. This is understandable. However, history has a funny way of putting “us all” in the same boat. As a young gay male in the 1960s, I thought of “condoms” as something heterosexuals had to worry about and deal with. Little did I dream that in my middle and old age I would be as much in need of condoms as any heterosexual! So, the story of possible male-male reproduction hit the airwaves and stirred up even the exploitative opportunists, the “snake oil” salespeople. Topping the list are a Montreal based religious group called the Raelians. Their prophet, Rael, claims he was abducted by aliens in 1974 and taken back to the home planet of the Elohim where he had lunch with numerous other prophets like Buddha, Jesus Christ and Mohammed. Attachment 3 Clone Rights United Front www.clonerights.com Editorial Religious Group Hijacks Human Cloning Movement January 8, 2001 The following letter was written to a media researcher regarding the Raelians' exploitation of human cloning I get the impression that you are focusing on the Raelians. This is so unfortunate. They are exploiters and rip-offs. It is sickening to see a bunch of space-cadet cultists becoming the focus of media attention in this most important new movement. I have denounced them, beginning when they had their "surrogate mother cattle show" in Montreal last August. I had gone to Montreal and meet the young, naive, idealistic Raelian women who seemed so eager to volunteer to be surrogate mothers. I hate to see idealism abused. I really had to object when they held a press conference in San Francisco offering to clone children for gay male couples that would combine the genes of the two males. This was like selling tickets for a trip to the moon in 1960 right after Kennedy's declaration of going their within a decade. I think their advertising for parents with dying children to contact them to arrange to have their dying children cloned is morally reprehensible beyond description. They are being predatory on human beings in a most unconscionable manner. I discovered while participating in one of their conferences in Montreal that they were not "knowledgeable" people who followed the latest developments in stem cell therapy and other scientific advances. Their interest in cloning a child is only to provide a platform for their prophet Rael - a man who is probably best described as "a prisoner of his own delusions"-and make him "someone" in the history of humankind. You should read the NYT Science section article entitled "Sleep Paralysis". It gives a good perspective on people who have claimed experiences like Rael over the past several hundred years. This Japanese researcher believes that they enter a hypnotic state halfway between sleep and wakefulness. They really believe their delusions. Interestingly, their stories are very similar over the years. I always refer people to this story to explain the Raelians. It was published on July 6,1999. Nicholas D. Kristof wrote it, It was entitled "Alien Abduction? Science Calls It Sleep Paralysis". With a new reactionary President not only ready to deny Federal money to the presently proposed "stem cell research" but perhaps willing to introduce legislation to outlaw all stem cell research, even by private researchers, I'd like to think the public discussion could move beyond the antics of a bunch of circus sideshow freaks. I don't want to be too critical of the individual members of this group since I truly found them to be a loving and loveable group of people. They are just like a bunch of authentic "summer of love" hippies left over from 1967 except they have the added charm of not using drugs. I do hope to get a chance to talk to you. My issues in the human cloning movement (after reproductive freedom which is first for everyone involved) are twinning and religious freedom. The Raelians have one rightful place in this movement in that they say to ban cloning would violate their right of religious freedom. Winning and the special relationships between individuals and their later born twins are one of the things that fascinate me. Likewise, how cloning changes relationships in our society. A couple hours ago I got a phone call from a man in California. His mother was dying of pancreatic cancer and he wanted to know where he might have DNA stored for possible cloning in the future. I suggested www.alcore.com but told him it would be at least five to ten years before cloning was safe, effective and available to all at a reasonable price. Funny, I'd just been discussing with Brian Alexander last night the idea of "raising your mother as your daughter". Would you be a better parent to her than she was to you? Would you have special advantages in knowing her personality traits (musical gifts on the positive side or hypochondria on the negative) and be able to be a better parent for that reason? I've gotten many requests from people with dying mothers. Most come from parents who have lost children. Many come from people who have lost pets. Oh well, I just wanted to try to get my two cents worth in. It was bad enough seeing Richard Seed make us all look like fools a couple years ago. Even now, his name is the one most associated with the cloning movement. I'll attach a summary of questions I answered for a possible focus on an Internet publication about our activities in the human cloning movement. Cloningly yours, Randolfe H. Wicker Attachment 4 A Christian's Letter to CLONAID --From the files of Clonerights.com “. . . Is now as thoroughly committed to cloning as she is to Christianity. 'It's in the Bible –be Fruitful and Multiply, ' She says. 'People say, 'you're playing God.' But we're not. We're using the raw materials the good Lord gave us.” – Time Magazine, February 19, 2001, page 56. From: xxxxxxxxxxxx.aol.com To: nadine@vegasnet.net Subject: Your fees for "CLONAID" Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 15:46:34 EST Dear Ms. Gary: I am a strong proponent of human cloning. I foresee a time very soon when I could use such services as you have described. I have read extensively on the subject, including an interview of Ian Wilmut, and am a proud member of the Human Cloning Foundation. In fact, that is how I found out about your organization. Be that as it may, I am concerned about your exorbitant charges. Now, as I understand it, the actual application of cloning DNA with humans is still very much experimental. Though the process has proven successful with other mammals, it has yet to be done with human subjects. Unless I am mistaken, there has not yet been a cloned human embryo implanted in a surrogate who has successfully given birth to a healthy infant. So, there are no proven "services" which can be offered. Am I wrong in this assumption? If I am correct, it seems to me you should be soliciting for research subjects -- human volunteers who will donate their DNA for cloning purposes. That is how it all started with Louise Brown, the first "test tube" baby. Did her parents pay $200,000 for this "In vitro fertilization" experiment? (Or the equivalent dollar amount in 1978.) I doubt very much they paid anything. Louise's parents were just an ordinary couple, apparently unable to procreate on their own, and needed medical assistance. IVF was an experimental procedure at the time (having proven feasible with other mammalian species) and the Browns volunteered for the research study, which were funded by outside sources. Please explain your rationale for putting a price on this experimental method of reproduction with human DNA. I am not criticizing you in any way. I just need to understand the Raelian "Mission" more clearly. In order for human cloning to truly advance, it absolutely must be made available to all people, certainly not just wealthy celebrities or the business elite. There are millions of sincere, honest infertile couples, and single people who would love to participate as test subjects in a legitimate DNA cloning research study. Some may actually be able to supply funding for this venture, but most cannot afford it, and no one should expect it. Marketing this technology now, before it is proven on humans, is premature, to say the least. I would assume the laboratories with whom you subcontract already have the funding necessary to proceed with such research. In that case, there is no need to charge anything to the individual for cloning. Since you are the "go-between", or liaison, perhaps a modest retainer or "finders fee" would be appropriate. Storage fees for DNA could also be made more accessible to the person of average means. There is no insurance policy, which covers such a plan, and very few American families can afford $50,000 (lump sum) to pay for such a service. Do you offer long term financing for this? Let me hear back from you soon. I want you to know that I am grateful for your progressive outlook on humanity, and look forward to initiating many dialogues with the Raelians. Thanks so much for your assistance. God Bless you, xxxxxxxxxxxxx Dear Sir, Thank you for your interest in our company and the promising technology of human cloning. Please log on to www.clonaid.com for more information about our services and www.rael.org to better understand the philosophy, which prompted Rael, the founder of CLONAID, to create the first human cloning company in the world. When a technology is new it is usually very costly and as it becomes developed and widely used by the public, its price will decrease. We are keeping you on our mailing list to inform you of future price modifications for our services. Warm regards, Nadine Gary, PR Clone Rights United Front www.clonerights.com Questions & Answers Re: CLONAID and the Raelian Movement ----- Original Message ----- From: Rentilly@aol.com To: rwicker@gateway.net mailto:rwicker@gateway.net Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2001 2:25 PM Subject: press query I am an LA-based journalist writing about the cloning efforts of CLONAID and the Raelian Movement. Wondering if you are familiar with their work, and would kindly respond to the below-listed email questions prior to tomorrow (Thurs 1/25) evening. Many thanks, J. Rentilly ICON Magazine 1. Briefly state your reasons for supporting the cloning of human beings, and any scientific or publishing work you have done toward this goal. (1) See "mission statement" at www.clonerights.com. Read the Wired Magazine article and you will see that my "work" is bringing those together who want to be cloned with those who want to clone human beings as well as just gathering together those who support human cloning in general. Under "history of the movement" you will find four years of stories of activities taken in this regard. Under "documents" you will find my testimony to Congress in February of 1998. The proposed anti-cloning legislation was defeated 54to 42 by a bipartisan coalition. 2. Are you familiar with the efforts of CLONAID and the Raelians? If so, what do you think are their strengths? Their weaknesses? (2) The Raelians have only one "legitimate argument". They have a religion, which has cloning very central in it. "Cloning" is the reward for a life well lived on the home planet from which they maintain all life comes. They say outlawing cloning would violate their "freedom of religion". To that extent, they are legitimate. Beyond that they are morally reprehensible due to all the reasons spelled out in my "letter to the media" posted as an update on "Crazies Steal the Movement" under "editorials" at www.clonerights.com They have the "strength of numbers" since they have many naive followers whom they are exploiting but who are willing to serve as egg donors and/or surrogate mothers. Their weakness is total. They know virtually nothing about science. Dr. Seed says that when Brigitte Bossilier visited him, she didn't ask one intelligent scientific question the whole time she was there. No responsible researcher would become involved with them. They don't have "the judgment" to know who is capable and who isn't. They'll rip naive victims off. Then, some charlatan will rip them off as well. What goes around comes around. It's Karma. The Raelians are "snake oil salesmen". Individually, I found them to be very loving and loveable people, like a lovely group of hippies left over from 1967 that simply don't do drugs. 3. Do you think that the inclusion of UFO-logy in the Raelian faith is counter to, or betrays the social importance of, cloning in general? (3) Good question. Since 75% of the general public supposedly believes in flying saucers, I really don't know how to answer your question. It does totally destroy the idea of a "human cloning movement" because it involves a very serious idea with a flashy bit of nonsense. Rather it makes the "human cloning movement" a victim of a "prophet" who is "a prisoner of his own delusions". 4.What do you think will be the most significant obstacle for any group interested in cloning a human being, particularly in the US? (4)The most significant obstacle for any group interested in cloning in the United States will be censorious attitudes by professionals in the fertility industry. They will feel that they will have "to punish" any violator or else be regulated themselves. Those FDA regulations are just "fluff" and have no real weight. They would not withstand any legal challenge. Ask any knowledgeable lawyer about hat. Cloning is not a "food" nor is it a "drug". The second major problem might be money. With human eggs costing $5,000 and surrogate mothers also quite expensive (should one be needed) expenses can mount quickly. Cloning a human being today is dangerous and experimental. However, I feel that an "informed" person or couple has the right to "take their chances". Just like the Wright brothers took the chance to fly the Kitty Hawk after countless people had died trying to fly. 5. Simply, do you think the Raelians have the technology and/or political sway necessary to succeed in their efforts? (5) The Raelains have no political influence. They have about as much clout as the "snake handlers in the rural south" or those guys who sell prayer cloths on public access television to put over the sick part of your faithful body. 6. What projects would you like mentioned in the article, due to be published this May? (6) I would appreciate acknowledgement of our organizations and web sites in your article. I will be featured on 60 Minutes in early March. The Raelians might be "fun" but we are serious and rational. Cloningly yours, Randolfe H. Wicker Director, Human Cloning Foundation www.humancloning.org Founder, Clone Rights United Front www.clonerights.com A posting from the one of the many interactive forums at: www.humancloning.org LET DIVERGENT BIOETHICAL VOICES BE HEARD Posted by Randolfe Wicker , Sat, Mar 17, 2001, 20:57:20 Post Reply Main Forum LET THE MANY VOICES OF BIOETHICS BE HEARD Unfortunately, the “power structure” of bioethics in the United States has come to resemble the power structure within the Roman Catholic Church. There is only “one” voice speaking for bioethicists in America. This voice acts like a “secular pope” and presumes to talk for all of those studying the deep moral and ethical issues in our society. The time has come for other more-nuance voices to be heard.. Pope Arthur Caplan needs to learn that he has no monopoly on bioethical debate in this country. He has hypnotized the media and manipulated himself into such a revered position that television producers I have worked with (who don't want to use him) are ordered by their producers to do so. This is because this one voice has achieved “Papal” authority. This one man has so overshadowed this field that his opinions carry the same weight in bioethical circles as pronouncements of the Pope carry within the Roman Catholic Church. This does a great disservice to all those in the field. Bioethics is a broad and open playing field. Many opinions should be heard. No one person should achieve a monopoly on bioethical thought. Bioethics is not an institution like the Roman Catholic Church. It is a forum, a common meeting ground, where differing moral views can be offered, debated and explored. Today, we have a great debate about human cloning. Pope Arthur Caplan enters this debate by declaring that those favoring it and/or trying to see it become a reality “should be locked up”. This is no civilized way to commence a dialogue. Therefore, I have been urging Dr. Zavos and others involved in the human cloning movement to refuse to debate this self-anointed secular Pope. I will certainly refuse to do so. Once, I looked forward to going “one-on-one” with this clever and skillful venomous clown. He is a charming intellectually-corrupt crowd pleaser. I will now “bow out” of my once hoped-for “David versus Goliath” confrontation. I do so not because I worry that my “stone” is to small or my slingshot “too frayed”. I do so because after attending Princeton's Second Annual Bioethics Conference a few weeks ago, I realized that there were many capable and brilliant voices that just were never heard because Pope Arthur hogged the airways. Indeed, I do myself a disservice. Deflating a wind-bag is a much easier chore than dealing with an informed opponent who wants to “regulate you” rather than simply lock you up. I am writing this, not just for those visiting the www.humancloning.org website. I am writing this for every aspiring bioethicists waiting and wanting to be heard in the ethical debates facing our society. “Human cloning” is not the be-all and end-all of these debates. However, democracy of thought and the ability to be heard is a compelling and paramount issue here. I believe in freedom and the exchange of ideas. I believe that we, as a society, will be better for having numerous “ethical” voices (and conflicting opinions) expressed and heard. I therefore declare war on the tyranny that leads to monopoly of ideas. We all must be free of the tyranny of all Popes, be they religious or secular. We must embrace civility and pursue “truth” through a free exchange of ideas. To those ideals, I pledge my support for all those ignored and important bioethical voices waiting to be heard. I will do whatever I can to see that you are included in the great ethical debates facing our society. Cloningly yours, Randolfe H. Wicker Director, Human Cloning Foundation www.humancloning.org Founder, Clone Rights united Front, www.clonerights.com |
Activist Randolfe Wicker 
I would also like to note that, on this issue, I am speaking for myself and not as an official representative of The Human Cloning Foundation.
The mascot of the Cloning Movement: Dolly the Cloned Sheep 
Human Cloning pioneer Randolfe Wicker and Rael, founder of the Raelian religion (June, 1999)