The EU and stem cell research

Why Europe may soon split along religious lines

Stephen Pollard

4 August 2007

Stephen Pollard says that if embryonic stem cell research is banned in some parts of Europe — as it might be under the new EU treaty — old hostilities will resurface

Pope John Paul II told President Bush in 2001 that leaders must not succumb to the current ‘tragic coarsening of consciences’ and ‘acquiesce in evils such as euthanasia, infanticide and the creation for research purposes of human embryos, which were destined for destruction in the process’. His successor, Benedict, said last year that although adult stem cell research is fine, the destruction of human embryos to harvest stem cells is ‘not only devoid of the light of God but is also devoid of humanity’. The ends can never justify means that are ‘intrinsically illicit’.

(Muslim backing for such campaigns, however, has been absent. Although there are differences in view, most Islamic opinion holds that embryonic stem cell research is allowed provided that it is done to improve human health.)

But it is not just religious conservatives who lead the opposition. In 2003, Switzerland approved research on embryos. But a coalition of the Church and the Green party garnered sufficient signatures to force a referendum (in which over two-thirds then backed allowing research). The British Green party is also opposed. It argues that, ‘Current theory and practice place too much emphasis on interventions at the biochemical and individual levels, too little on the social and ecological. Achieving better health requires a balanced, integrated and holistic understanding and approach.’ Try telling a leukemia sufferer about the social interventions which might help him. A cuppa with a some friends? A night down the pub?

Powerful opposition, however, coincides with a strong church. It should not therefore be surprising that a country such as Britain, with some of the most ineffectual religious leadership, has some of the most permissive research laws.

The potency of this new technology, and the controversy surrounding it, means that we are heading towards a new division within the EU. With the influence of religious leadership remaining high in many member states, bans on treatment are near certain. A country such as Poland, for instance, will almost certainly continue to ban both research and treatments derived from scientific methods deemed unethical.

Individual member states can ban