The political battles over stem cell research continue to shift as new techniques are proposed as ways to circumvent ethical and religious questions.
UPDATED NOV. 21, 2007
For more sources, see ReligionLink’s Guide to Bioethics Experts
Skip to:
What’s new
National sources
Regional sources and state by state information
Government information
Religious stances
News articles
Polls
• On Nov. 20, 2007, a team of scientists announced that they had found a way to turn human skin cells into cells virtually identical to embryonic stem cells without destroying embryos. The discovery has the potential to eliminate the major ethical concerns that have limited embryonic stem cell research in the United States. See a Nov. 21, 2007, New York Times analysis.
• On June 20, 2007, President Bush vetoed legislation that would have expanded federal funding for embryonic stem cell research and issued an executive order that asked federal agencies to support research aimed at creating embryonic stem cells without destroying embryos. See a June 21, 2007, Washington Post story.
• The U.S. House voted to expand government-financed embryonic stem cell research on Jan. 11, 2007, but legislators did not have enough votes to overcome President Bush’s promised veto of the bill. (See a Jan. 11 Online NewsHour story.)
• On Jan. 7, 2007, an article published online by the journal Nature Biotechnology said that stem cells found in amniotic fluid surrounding the developing fetus are a promising potential source of treatment for a number of serious diseases. (Read an abstract of the article.) Amniotic fluid stem (AFS) cells also have some advantages not found in embryonic cells, the study says. Because AFS cells can be easily gathered without harming or destroying embryos, using them therapeutically would avoid the ethical issues involved in using embryonic cells.
AFS cells are intermediate between embryonic and adult stem cells, according to the research team’s leader, Dr. Anthony Atala, who directs the Institute of Regenerative Medicine at Wake Forest School of Medicine in Winston-Salem, N.C. AFS cells multiply rapidly; form stable, long-lasting cell lines; and have the ability to become a variety of different cell types, including nerve, bone, muscle, liver and blood vessel, the study reports. In addition, unlike embryonic cells, they do not tend to form tumors. Further research is needed before AFS cells can be used to treat humans.
Opponents of embryonic stem cell research praised the new findings. (See a Jan. 8, 2007, Catholic News Service story.) Some scientists, however, pointed out that AFS cells could not be a complete substitute for embryonic stem cells.
• Advanced Cell Technology, a biotech company in Worcester, Mass., claimed in an article published Aug. 24, 2006, in the prestigious journal Nature to have created human embryonic stem cell lines without destroying embryos. Through a technique used in fertility clinics for a number of years to perform pre-implantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) on embryos at high risk for genetic diseases, the researchers remove (or biopsy) a single cell (or blastomere) from an embryo at the very early eight-cell stage. Then, using special chemicals, the researchers induce biopsied cells to form embryonic stem cell lines. Previous methods of creating stem cell lines remove multiple cells from embryos further along in their development, a procedure that invariably destroys the embryo. Dr. Robert Lanza, M.D., Advanced Cell’s vice president of research and scientific development, led the project. Contact 508-756-1212.
Proponents of the new technique argue that it leaves embryos unharmed and capable of growing into normal babies if implanted in a woman’s womb. Although no conclusive clinical studies as yet show that the technique does not place embryos at higher risk of harm, children born from embryos that have had a single cell removed for PGD appear to be completely normal. Supporters also argue that creation of stem cell lines genetically identical to embryos benefits those embryos and the children they may become; in case of need, this argument goes, the person would have access to stem cells that his or her body will not reject. The new method’s developers hope that it will persuade the Bush administration or Congress to end the ban on use of embryonic stem cells created after 2001 in federally funded research.
Detractors, on the other hand, argue that, although the technique may not destroy embryos to create stem cells, it still poses potentially serious ethical issues. There is no evidence, they say, that the procedure will not harm the embryos or reduce their viability. Subjecting embryos to possible harm in the interest of science or the welfare of other persons is unethical, the critics say. In addition, some argue that the biopsed cells could themselves be used to create additional embryos. And some opponents reject any use whatsoever of embryos to create stem cell lines or in other stem cell research.
• On July 19, 2006, President Bush vetoed a bill that would have relaxed restrictions on federal funding of stem cell research. It was the first time in his presidency that Bush used his veto power. Read a July 20, 2006, CNN.com story.
• Most states are pursuing their own embryonic stem cell agendas. Some are pushing research, sometimes with public funding. Others are restricting research. The trend began when Bush limited federal funding for stem cell research in 2001 and has continued through this legislative session. See the National Conference of State Legislatures‘ summary of state laws, which is updated monthly, or search its list of state-by-state activity.
• An Aug. 3, 2005, poll by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life and the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press found that Americans now say by a nearly 2-1 ratio (57 percent to 30 percent) that it is more important to conduct stem cell research to find new cures than to protect the potential life of embryos involved in the research.
Why it Matters
Until now, embryonic stem cell research has forced people to choose between two potentially life-protecting principles – eradicating devastating diseases in children and adults and protecting human life at the embryonic stage. People cite religious beliefs and moral concerns as factors that shape their opinions on the issue. If the new technique could gain acceptance as a method of resolving this conflict, it could alter the discussion and even open the way to federal funding of research on new embryonic stem cell lines, which is now banned by Bush’s policy.
Questions for reporters
• What are your region’s opinion leaders on either side of the stem cell debate saying about the new technique? Has news of the new technique changed either expert or public opinion in your region?
• Are embryonic stem cell and human cloning bills being debated in your state legislature? What groups are for and against such bills, and what arguments are they using to support their stances? What groups are allied with each other?
• If there a strong biomedical industry or research community in your state, how is it reacting to new legislation and laws?
• What do residents – and particularly those close to people who could someday benefit from embryonic stem cell research – say about legislative efforts?
• Polls show more Americans support embryonic stem cell research now than a year ago. What is changing people’s minds?
National sources
CHRISTIAN
• Richard M. Doerflinger is deputy director of the Secretariat for Pro-Life Activities of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, which opposes embryonic stem cell research. He has concerns that “embryo farms” will be developed that will produce embryos to be implanted in women so they can be harvested later for stem cells. Contact 202-541-3070.
• The Rev. Bob Edgar is general secretary of the National Council of Churches. In November 2005 the NCC approved a first reading of “Fearfully and Wonderfully Made,” a new policy on biotechnology. The policy is intended to guide people through moral and ethical decision-making but does not offer specific recommendations on embryonic stem cell research and other issues that the NCC’s 35 member churches do not agree on. Contact through director of media relations Daniel Webster, 212-870-2252, dwebster@councilofchurches.org.
• Richard Land is president of the Southern Baptist Convention’s Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission. The SBC opposes embryonic stem cell research. Land has written a commentary on why the Senate bill calling for more federal funding for embryonic stem cell research should be defeated. Contact Jill Martin, 615-782-8417, jmartin@erlc.com.
• Marie T. Hilliard is director of bioethics and public policy for the National Catholic Bioethics Center. The group advocates finding ways to harvest stem cells without the use of embryos. Contact 617-787-1900.
• Dr. Daniel P. Sulmasy is director of the Bioethics Institute of New York Medical College, which teaches in a Roman Catholic tradition. Contact 914-594-4060, daniel_sulmasy@nymc.edu.
• Carrie Gordon Earll is bioethics analyst for Focus on the Family, which opposes all forms of cloning and embryonic stem cell research on the grounds that any embryo is a human life. Contact 719-548-5819, earllcg@fotf.org.
• Mark F. Carr is theological co-director for the Center for Christian Bioethics at Loma Linda University in California. In a 2001 article for Adventist Today, Carr details his support for embryonic stem cell research. Contact 909-558-4956.
JEWISH
• Nathan Diament is director of public policy for the Orthodox Union. He supports therapeutic cloning from a Jewish theological perspective, arguing that an embryo outside of the womb is not a viable life form. Contact 202-262-1844, ndiament@ou.org.
• Hadassah, the Women’s Zionist Organization of America, is lobbying state legislatures for medical research on embryonic stem cells. Contact Roberta Elliott, 212-303-8153, relliott@hadassah.org.
• Dr. Michael “Moshe” Akerman is director of the National Association of Judaism and Medicine, which looks at medical science in light of Jewish ethical tradition. Contact 866-210-0654.
•The United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism supports embryonic stem cell research within ethical guidelines, citing the Jewish values of “preserving life and promoting health.” Mark Waldman is director of public policy. Contact 212-533-7800, waldman@uscj.org.
MUSLIM
• Muzammil Siddiqi is director of the Islamic Society of Orange County in Garden Grove, Calif. He says Islam supports embryonic stem cell research within certain limits. Contact 949-442-2814.
• Abdulaziz A. Sachedina is a coordinator of the Islamic bioethics group of the International Association of Bioethics and is a professor of Islamic and Shi’ite studies at the University of Virginia in Charlottesville. He wrote the article “Human Clones: An Islamic View” for the book The Human Cloning Debate (Berkeley Hills Books, 2002). He also contributed the entry “Bioethics” for The Oxford Dictionary of Islam (Oxford University Press, 2002). Contact 434-924-6725, Sachedina@virginia.edu.
• Read a June 22, 2005, Christian Science Monitor story on the debate stem cell research is sparking in Muslim countries.
SOCIAL/MEDICAL GROUPS
• To see a list of advocacy groups associated with specific diseases and professional medical and scientific associations concerned with stem cell research, see the National Institutes of Health Stem Cell Information resources page.
• More than 60 leading scientists signed a Feb. 18, 2004, statement criticizing the Bush administration’s science policies. The Union of Concerned Scientists is an alliance of more than 100,000 scientists and concerned citizens. Contact UCS chairman Kurt Gottfried by calling Morrow Carter, 415-453-0430.
• Sean B. Tipton is a president of the Coalition for the Advancement of Medical Research which represents universities and health advocates and supports research cloning. Contact 202-863-2492, stipton@asrm-dc.org.
• Andrew Fergusson is president and CEO of the Center for Bioethics and Human Dignity, a nonprofit group founded by Christian bioethicists. The group has issued a statement on stem cell research. Contact Joe Carter, 847-317-4094, jpcarter@cbhd.org.
• Douglas Johnson is legislative director of the National Right to Life Committee, which opposes embryonic stem cell research. He says bills such as one New Jersey passed in 2003 legalizing embryonic stem cell research promote fetus farming. Contact Megan Dillon, 202-626-8825.
• Judy Norsigian, co-founder of the Boston Women’s Health Book Collective and co-author of the classic feminist book Our Bodies, Ourselves (Touchstone, 2005) and its updates, testified last year in favor of the House ban on therapeutic cloning, saying it takes advantage of women’s bodies to harvest their eggs. Contact 617-414-1231, judy@bwhbc.org.
• The Genetics & Public Policy Center of the Johns Hopkins University in Washington, D.C., “works to help policy leaders, decision makers, and the public better understand the rapidly evolving field of human genetics and its application to healthcare.” The Center studies the ethical, social and legal implications of genetic technologies, including PGD, surveys public opinion on genetics, and does other analyses. The director of communications is Rick E. Borchelt. Contact 202-663-5992, rborche1@jhu.edu.
GOVERNMENT
• Members of the National Institutes of Health Stem Cell Task Force can be contacted through media liaison Don Ralbovsky, 301-496-5787, ralbovsd@mail.nih.gov.
• Dr. Edmund D. Pelligrino is chairman of the President’s Council on Bioethics. He is emeritus professor of medicine and medical ethics at Georgetown University in Washington, D.C. Contact 202-687-5397, pellegre@georgetown.edu.
• The National Conference of State Legislatures, a nonpartisan group that advises lawmakers, offers a 2006 guide for policy makers on stem cell research. Alissa Johnson tracks the issue. Contact 202-624-5400, alissa.johnson@ncsl.org.
Background
GOVERNMENT INFORMATION
• The National Institutes of Health Stem Cell Information home page includes links to:
• current federal policy, including a 2001 directive on Bush’s deleted “President” new stem cell policy.
• online resources, including links to advocacy groups identified with specific diseases,
professional associations and research centers.
• FAQs.
• a glossary.
• a primer on stem cell basics.
• Read “Monitoring Stem Cell Research,” a January 2004 report by the President’s Council on Bioethics. The council’s web site also includes other reports on stem cell issues.
OTHER BACKGROUND
• Read a policy brief on stem cell research from the American Association for the Advancement of Science, including the scientific and political history of stem cell debates, dating back to the first reported isolation of embryonic stem cells in 1998.
• See CNN’s interactive Web page on stem calls.
RELIGIOUS STANCES
• For links to religious perspectives on stem cell and cloning issues, scroll toward the bottom of the Bioethics page of the Pew Forum on Religion & Public life.
• Read “Stem Cells and Clones: Theological Perspectives on Biomedical Research,” a Nov. 15, 2002, forum presented by the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life.
• A Beliefnet background piece on where religious groups stand on the issue of embryonic stem cell research.
• A March 11, 2005, Slate article on divisions between Jews and Catholics over stem cell research.
NEWS ARTICLES
• See an April 9, 2007, Reuters story about the U.S. Senate votes. It’s posted by TVnz.co.nz.
• See an April 5, 2007, Stateline.org article about three new Democratic governors who have joined six other state leaders in supporting stem cell research.
• See a Jan. 8, 2007, Newsweek story about stem cells found in amniotic fluid.
• See a July 20, 2006, Stateline.org article about stem cell wars in state capitols.
• Read an August 24, 2006 article about the new technique in Nature.
• Read a July 26, 2005, Stateline.org story that cites stem cell legislation as an example of innovative ways states are enacting social policy during congressional gridlock.
• Read a Feb. 15, 2005, USA Today story about how states are struggling to weigh moral values while pursuing legislation to attract stem cell research.
• Read an Aug. 12, 2004, Stateline.org story about the flurry of stem cell legislation in the states.
• The National Institutes of Health offers links to news reports explaining scientific and ethical issues in stem cell research.
Polls
• An Aug. 3, 2005, poll by the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life and the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press found that by a nearly 2-1 ratio (57 percent to 30 percent) Americans said it was more important to conduct stem cell research to find new cures than to not destroy the potential life of embryos involved in the research. It noted that support for stem cell research was growing among major religious groups, with the exception of white evangelical Protestants. An Aug. 24, 2004, poll by the same groups found that stem cell research may help Democrats even though the Republican Party is more closely identified with religion.
• Pollingreport.com lists recent polls from different organizations about stem cell research.
Regional sources
STATE BY STATE
• For the status of stem cell legislation in your state, search the National Conference of State Legislatures’ Genetics Legislation Database.
• See the National Conference of State Legislatures’ page on State Embryonic and Fetal Research Laws to see a summary of laws and proposed legislation around the country. It is updated monthly.
• The National Institutes of Health Stem Cell Information includes links to research centers around the country.
• The National Association of State Catholic Conference Directors opposes embryonic stem cell research. A listing of state chapters is available on the group’s web site.
• The National Right to Life Committee opposes embryonic stem cell research. The group offers a listing of state chapters on its web site.
• NARAL Pro-Choice America supports embryonic stem cell research. The group offers a list of state affiliates on its web site.
IN THE NORTHEAST
• George Daley is a stem cell biologist with the Whitehead Institute and Harvard Medical School. He supports a bill that would allow embryonic stem cell research in Massachusetts. Contact 617-258-7209, daley@wi.mit.edu.
• Margaret A. Farley is a professor of Christian ethics at Yale University in New Haven, Conn. She wrote the chapter “Roman Catholic Views on Research Involving Human Embryonic Stem Cells” for The Human Embryonic Stem Cell Debate (MIT Press, 2001). Contact 203-432-5355, margaret.farley@yale.edu.
• Ronald M. Green is a professor of religion at Dartmouth College in Hanover, N.H. He wrote The Human Embryo Research Debates: Bioethics in the Vortex of Controversy (Oxford University Press, 2001). Contact 603-646-3141, Ronald.M.Green@dartmouth.edu.
• Thomas Anthony Shannon is professor of religion and ethics at the Worcester Polytechnic Institute in Worcester, Mass. He wrote Made in Whose Image?: Genetic Engineering and Christian Ethics (Humanity Books, 2000) and co-wrote New Genetic Medicine: Theological and Ethical Reflections (Rowman & Littlefield, 2003). Contact 508-831-5468, tshannon@wpi.edu.
• Lisa Sowle Cahill is a professor of theology at Boston College. She wrote the chapter “Stem Cells and Social Ethics: Some Catholic Contributions” for Stem Cell Research: New Frontiers in Science and Ethics (University of Notre Dame Press, 2003). She also wrote the article “Religion Based Perspective on Cloning of Humans” for the journal Ethics and Medicine (1998). Contact 617-552-3890, Lisa.Cahill@bc.edu.
IN THE EAST
• The Rev. Ronald Cole-Turner is a professor of theology and ethics at Pittsburgh Theological Seminary. He co-edited God and the Embryo: Religious Voices on Stem Cells and Cloning (Georgetown University Press, 2003) and edited Human Cloning: Religious Responses (Westminster John Knox Press, 1997). Contact 412-441-2170, coleturn@pts.edu.
• J. David Bleich is a professor at the Cardozo School of Law at Yeshiva University in New York. He co-edited Jewish Bioethics (KTAV Publishing House, 2000). Contact 212-790-0294, bleich@ymail.yu.edu.
• Arthur L. Caplan is a professor of bioethics and director of the Center for Bioethics at the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia. He wrote Am I My Brother’s Keeper?: The Ethical Frontiers of Biomedicine (Indiana University Press, 1997). Contact 215-898-7136, caplan@mail.med.upenn.edu.
• Rabbi Aaron L. Mackler is associate professor of theology at Duquesne University in Pittsburgh. He edited the book Life and Death Responsibilities in Jewish Biomedical Ethics (Jewish Theological Seminary of America, 2000). Contact 412-396-5985, mackler@duq.edu.
• George P. Smith II is professor of law at Catholic University of America in Washington, D.C. He wrote Human Rights and Biomedicine (Kluwer International, 2000). Contact 202-319-5140, smithg@cua.edu.
• The Rev. John Langan is a professor of philosophy at Georgetown University in Washington, D.C. He wrote the entry “Stem Cell Research and Religious Freedom” for Stem Cell Research: New Frontiers in Science and Ethics (University of Notre Dame Press, 2003). Contact 202-687-6746, langanj@georgetown.edu.
IN THE SOUTH
• Wendy Baldwin is vice president for research at the University of Kentucky in Louisville. She has argued before the Kentucky state legislature in favor of embryonic stem cell research. Contact 859-257-5294, vpr@email.uky.edu.
• E. Christian Brugger is an assistant professor of ethics in the department of religious studies at Loyola University New Orleans. He wrote the essay “Embryos, Clones and Stem Cells” for the New Oxford Review (Vol. 70, No. 9, Oct. 2003). Contact 504-865-3063, ecbrugge@loyno.edu.
• Scott C. Williamson is assistant professor of theological ethics at Louisville Presbyterian Theological Seminary in Louisville, Ky. He wrote the article “The Ethics of Human Cloning and Its Implications for the Family: A Few Preliminary Matters” for the journal Family Ministry: Empowering Through Faith. Contact 800-264-1839 ext. 483, swilliamson@lpts.edu.
IN THE SOUTHEAST
• Read a Feb. 4, 2005, Washington Post article on a Virginia Senate panel approving a bill for stem cell research funding.
• James F. Childress is professor of religious studies at the University of Virginia in Charlottesville. He co-wrote Principles of Biomedical Ethics, 5th Edition (Oxford University Press, 2001). Contact 434-924-6724, Childress@virginia.edu.
• Mary Jo Iozzio is professor of theology and philosophy at Barry University in Miami Shores, Fla. She edited Considering Religious Traditions in Bioethics: Christian and Jewish Voices (University of Scranton Press, 2000). Contact 305-899-3944, miozzio@mail.barry.edu.
• Timothy Mark Renick is associate professor of philosophy at Georgia State University in Atlanta. He wrote the article “A Cabbit in Sheep’s Clothing: Exploring the Sources of Our Moral Disquiet About Cloning” for the journal Annual of the Society of Christian Ethics. Contact 404-651-0723, trenick@gsu.edu.
• John C. Fletcher is a professor emeritus for the Center for Biomedical Ethics at the University of Virginia in Charlottesville. He wrote the entries “The Stem Cell Debate in Historical Context” and “The NBAC’s (National Bioethics Advisory Commission) Arguments on Embryo Research: Strengths and Weaknesses” for The Human Embryonic Stem Cell Debate (MIT Press, 2001). Contact 703-566-1144, jcf4x@Virginia.edu.
IN THE MIDWEST
• Read a March 9, 2005, Milwaukee Journal Sentinel article on a Washington, D.C., meeting of state biotechnology leaders on the impact federal limits on stem cell research have on state economies.
• Read a March 11, 2005, article on the web site LifeNews.com on efforts in Nebraska to limit and expand stem cell research.
• Read a March 18, 2005, State Journal-Register article on placing a stem cell research funding referendum on Illinois’ November 2006 ballot. The article is on the Anabaptist Center for Healthcare Ethics web site.
• Gilbert C. Meilaender is professor of theology at Valparaiso University in Valparaiso, Ind. He wrote the article “Some Protestant Reflections” for The Human Embryonic Stem Cell Debate (MIT Press, 2001). Contact 219-464-5340, gilbert.meilaender@valpo.edu.
• Laurie Zoloth is a professor of medical humanities and bioethics at the Feinberg School of Medicine at Northwestern University. She co-edited The Human Embryonic Stem Cell Debate: Science, Ethics and Public Policy (MIT Press, 2001). Contact 312-503-4621, lzoloth@northwestern.edu.
• Gerard Magill is executive director of the Center for Health Care Ethics at St. Louis University. He edited Genetics and Ethics: An Interdisciplinary Study (Saint Louis University Press, 2004) and wrote the article “The Ethics Weave in Human Genomics, Embryonic Stem Cell Research and Therapeutic Cloning: Promoting and Protecting Society’s Interests” for the Albany Law Review (2002). Contact 314-577-8195, magill@slu.edu.
• M. Therese Lysaught is associate professor of religious studies at the University of Dayton in Ohio. She wrote the article “What Would You Do If …? Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research and the Defense of the Innocent” for Stem Cell Research: New Frontiers in Science and Ethics (University of Notre Dame Press, 2003). Contact 937-229-2079, lysaught@notes.udayton.edu.
• Brent Waters is associate professor of Christian social ethics for the Garrett-Evangelical Theological Seminary in Evanston, Ill. He co-edited God and the Embryo: Religious Voices on Stem Cells and Cloning (Georgetown University Press, 2003). Contact 847-866-3933, Brent.Waters@garrett.edu.
• James M. Childs Jr. is a professor at Trinity Lutheran Seminary in Columbus, Ohio. He wrote the 1991 article “Genetics, ethics and the human future” for the Trinity Seminary. Contact 614-235-4136, jchilds@trinity.capital.edu.
• Dena S. Davis is a professor at the Cleveland-Marshall College of Law at Cleveland State University in Cleveland. She wrote the article “Informed Consent for Stem Cell Research in the Public Sector” for the Journal of the American Medical Women’s Association. Contact 216-687-2312, dena.davis@law.csuohio.edu.
• Gerald P. McKenny is an associate professor of Christian ethics for the University of Notre Dame. He wrote the article “Religion, Biotechnology, and the Integrity of Nature: A Critical Examination” for Religion and Biotechnology: Critical Perspectives (Georgetown University Press, 2000). Contact 574-631-4520, Gerald.P.McKenny.4@nd.edu.
• Jefferson McMahan is an associate professor of philosophy at the University of Illinois in Urbana-Champaign. He wrote the article “Cloning, Killing and Identity” for the Journal of Medical Ethics. Contact 217-333-7229, jmcmahan@uiuc.edu.
IN THE SOUTHWEST
• Ronald A. Carson is a professor and director of the Institute for Medical Humanities at the University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston. He co-edited Behavioral Genetics: The Clash of Culture and Biology (Johns Hopkins University Press, 1999). Contact 409-772-2376, racarson@utmb.edu.
• B. Andrew Lustig is a research scholar and director of the Program on Biotechnology, Religion and Ethics at Rice University in Houston. He wrote the article “Human Cloning: Created Co-Creation or Hubris?” for Considering Religious Traditions in Bioethics: Christian and Jewish Voices (University of Scranton Press, 2001). Contact 713-348-2231, alustig@rice.edu.
• Daniel B. McGee is a professor of ethics at Baylor University in Waco, Texas. He wrote the article “A Consistent Center for Bioethics” for the Theological Educator: A Journal of Theology and Ministry. Contact 254-719-6316 ext. 6316, daniel_mcgee@baylor.edu.
• Jane Maienschein is a professor of history and philosophy of science at Arizona State University in Tempe. She wrote Whose View of Life?: Embryos, Cloning, and Stem Cells (Harvard University Press, 2003). Contact 480-965-6105, maienschein@asu.edu.
IN THE WEST/NORTHWEST
• Rabbi Elliot N. Dorff is professor of bioethics and philosophy at the University of Judaism in Bel Air, Calif. He wrote the article “Angles of Vision – Stem Cell Research: A Jewish Perspective” for The Human Embryonic Stem Cell Debate (MIT Press, 2001). Contact 310-476-9777 ext. 255, edorff@uj.edu. (Ed. note: The University of Judaism merged with Brandeis-Bardin to become American Jewish University in 2007.)
• John Hyde Evans is assistant professor of sociology at the University of California, San Diego. He wrote Playing God?: Human Genetic Engineering and the Rationalization of Public Bioethical Debate (University of Chicago Press, 2000). Contact 858-534-4972, jhevans@ucsd.edu.
• Karen Lebacqz is professor emeritus of theological ethics at the Graduate Theological Union in Berkeley, Calif. She co-edited The Human Embryonic Stem Cell Debate: Science, Ethics and Public Policy (MIT Press, 2001) and co-authored Ethics and Spiritual Care: A Guide for Pastors, Chaplains and Spiritual Directors (Abingdon Press, 2001). Contact 510-849-8250, klebacqz@psr.edu.
• Michael M. Mendiola is associate professor of Christian ethics for the Graduate Theological Union in Berkeley, Calif. He wrote the article “Human Embryonic Stem Cells: Possible Approaches from a Catholic Perspective” for The Human Embryonic Stem Cell Debate (MIT Press, 2001). Contact 510-848-0528, mmendiola@psr.edu.
• Dr. Irving Weissman is head of the stem cell research program at Stanford University in Palo Alto, Calif. He opposes an effort to repeal California’s law legalizing embryonic stem cell research. Contact 650-723-6520, irv@stanford.edu.
• Suzanne Holland is associate professor of religious and social ethics at the University of Puget Sound in Tacoma, Wash. She co-edited The Human Embryonic Stem Cell Debate: Science, Ethics and Public Policy (MIT Press, 2001). She also wrote the article “Genetics, Difference and Disability” for the Florida State College of Law Review (2003). Contact 253-879-3750, sholland@ups.edu.
