| This dissertation examines the moral debates surrounding stem cell research, therapeutic cloning, pre-implantation genetic diagnosis, genetic engineering and reproductive cloning in Germany and the U.S.---two nations with quite different attitudes toward the moral status of the human embryo and the importance of individual reproductive choice.; Germany went into the abortion debate with a concept of human dignity which, as it was applied by the Constitutional Court, protected the dignity of the embryo as human life and denied, at least de jure, a woman the right to make her own reproductive choices. Today, German politicians and legislators are seeking ways to adjust the concept of human dignity to permit at least some medical procedures that involve the destruction of embryos. I argue in favor of this shift, but suggest that it is problematic because the notion that human dignity is absolute and unconditional, extending equally to all members of the human race, was the legal foundation of a new Germany dedicated to preventing the reoccurrence of the horrors of the Holocaust.; The U.S. emerged from the abortion decision with a theory of personal privacy that gave legal priority to a woman's control of her body over any asserted right-to-life of the embryo. American law thus gave no thought to what our obligations to the embryo might be in situations where it does not come into conflict with a woman's right to control her own body. But these are precisely the practical situations brought about by medical, as opposed to reproductive, uses of embryos. Today, American liberalism is challenged to clarify its goals: to pursue the new technologies in the name of freedom regardless of the moral "costs"; or to reconsider some of its traditional values (such as the prevention of harm) and risk having to reject at least those new technologies that threaten these values. |
