Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Live At Daybreak

Congress Bans Human Cloning

Aired August 01, 2001 - 07:17   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
COLLEEN MCEDWARDS, CNN ANCHOR: Taking another look now at the hot-button issue of human cloning: As we reported, the House overwhelmingly voted against it, even when it comes to cloning human cells for medical research.

CNN's Jonathan Karl has our report.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

JONATHAN KARL, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice over): Nobody in Congress proposes allowing the science that made Dolly the cloned sheep famous to be used to clone people. But some argue that cloning a human embryo is different than cloning a person.

REP. JERROLD NADLER (D), NEW YORK: We value life. And a human being is not simply a clump of cells. At some point, that clump of cells may develop into a fetus and a human being, but the clump of cells at the beginning does not have the same moral value as a person.

KARL: Nadler and others argue that a ban on human cloning should include an exception -- legalizing the cloning of embryos for medical research. The House soundly rejected that argument, instead passing by a margin of 265 to 162 a total ban on human cloning.

REP. TOM DELAY (R-TX), MAJORITY WHIP: We shouldn't draw medical solutions from the unwholesome well of an ungoverned, monstrous science that lacks any reasonable consideration for the sanctity of human life.

KARL: The arguments echo the debate over federal funding of stem cell research with one significant difference. That debate is over research on excess embryos at fertility clinics, embryos likely to be destroyed anyway. This is about using the science of cloning to create new embryos for research.

REP. DAVID WU (D), OREGON: I have always been a strong supporter of embryonic stem cell research. I have always been strongly pro- choice. I have been a believer, I guess, that we would know where to draw a line in the sand when we had to, and I think that, for me, this is the place where we draw a line in the sand.

KARL (on camera): Senate Democratic leader Tom Daschle also agrees with conservative Republicans on this issue making it more likely that the Senate will also pass a total ban on human cloning. Jonathan Karl, CNN, Capitol Hill.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

CAROL LIN, CNN ANCHOR: And on another very emotional issue now facing Congress and the president of the United States -- will they ban stem cell research on human embryos?

We have talked to researchers and government officials about this, but perhaps no one has a better view of this controversy than two mothers with two very differing opinions.

First, Patty Lance, she wants embryonic stem cell research to go forward. She started a foundation three years ago after her son, Jeff, broke his neck and was paralyzed after a surfing accident.

And then there is Lucinda Borden. Lucinda and her husband, John, adopted two embryos, and that enabled them to give birth to twins -- Mark and Luke. She testified before Congress saying that she believes that using embryonic or human embryos is actually tantamount to killing children.

I welcome both of you this morning.

LUCINDA BORDEN, ADOPTED TWIN SONS AS EMBRYOS: Good morning.

PATTY LANCE, MOTHER OF SPINE INJURY VICTIM: Good morning.

LIN: Patty, let me start with you. Tell me Jeff's story. What exactly happened to him?

LANCE: Three years ago, Jeff was living in California and was surfing in Newport Beach, and the theory is that he got wiped out by a wave, hit a sand dune, broke his neck and then proceeded to drown. He was dual diagnosed. He had not only a spinal cord injury, but he had an anoxic episode, which resulted in a brain injury that created him to lose his short-term memory.

LIN: And so how is it that research on human embryos might change Jeff's situation?

LANCE: What we're finding -- and it's probably now about two years that we have learned through the research that a human embryo to stem cells had the ability to be implanted and to repair the spinal cord. And so needless to say, this type of research and the acceleration of it in the research labs would assure Geoffrey the opportunity to walk and live his life on his feet as opposed to sitting in a wheelchair.

LIN: So Lucinda, what do you say to a mother like Patty who sees such tremendous hope for her son in research with human embryos?

BORDEN: The thing that I see is that the fact that human embryo research hasn't done anything that it has said at this point. Adult stem cell research has. There is walking, living proof that adult stem cell works and embryo doesn't. And the other point is -- can you trade one life for another? Is that a fair question to ask?

LIN: Well, are you saying that a human embryo is more valuable than Jeff's life and the hope that he might walk again?

BORDEN: I am saying that children, just like mine, are just as valuable as your husband -- as your child.

LIN: Patty?

LANCE: Well, actually what we have learned is that the adult stem cell do not proliferate as well as the embryo stem cell does. We are not trading lives. What we're talking about is that we know that there are in excess of 100,000 fertilized embryos sitting in refrigerators of clinics that will never be used. They are not destined to be implanted in the uterus. They are not destined to become life. They are destined to be discarded.

And these are the stem cells that the research labs need to have access to and the funding is needed, so that we can go forward with this very promising research. This is the hope -- it's the hope for spinal cord injury, it's the hope for all central nervous disorders, strokes, Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, MS -- the list goes on. And it is the embryo stem cell, not the adult stem cell, that is at this point the most promising research today.

LIN: Lucinda, is there a compromise? I mean, are you saying that all these hundreds of thousands of embryos that would not be used that would be discarded and end up in the trash bin, all of those should be available for adoption? Or would you be able to reconcile in your own mind that a certain percentage could be set aside for adoption and the rest for research?

BORDEN: I couldn't reconcile that killing one life is worth it. And I have a hard time with the fact that all of these are out there and can be used. We're talking about families who have tried to have children. They look into the eyes of their children, and they know that their siblings are sitting in a freezer. And they are told that the only choice is that they can be destroyed. Well, that's not the only choice.

LIN: Patty, you have heard the arguments. These human embryos are actually future children. These are lives as well. Where in your mind does life begin in this debate?

LANCE: I think life begins with the intent of the embryo. If the embryo is intended to be implanted into the uterus, then, yes, there is an intention for life. If the intent of the embryo is that it is not going to be implanted, that it is excess, it is going to be discarded, there is not life there. There is hope in the research labs to improve life.

LIN: It's going to be a difficult decision. President Bush has said it's going to be a very emotional one as well. He has not yet said, though, when he will announce what he has decided. Patty Lance -- thank you very much -- Lucinda Borden.

LANCE: Thank you.

LIN: I know it's very early...

BORDEN: Thank you.

LIN: ... out there in California. Thanks for getting up for us.

BORDEN: Thank you.

LIN: Colleen.

MCEDWARDS: Yes, in fact, he said he is going to take his time. That he will not rush this decision. And when it is made, he hopes that the American people realize it was a measured decision.

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com.