Sanctity of the human genome as foundation of life

Main Article Content

Marietjie Botes

Abstract

In times before ethics and laws were formalised, it was commonly held that human life is sacred since it is divinely ordained and because of this divine intervention human life must be protected by implication due to it being holy. As a result, people often assume that this meant that human life is completely inviolable. This view of life is more prominent in western religious philosophies and had been raised in many legal debates about human life such as abortion and euthanasia. To ensure survival and peaceful coexistence the uniqueness of human life was emphasized so that people would respect the worth of human life. This respect entailed values such as equality and autonomy and incorporated both reciprocal rights and obligations to one another. History, in the form of wars and pandemics, has proven that when legal systems ignore these basic human rights, it will lead to tyranny and anarchy. The atrocities committed during the Second World War prompted nation states to collect the values of human life into a single concept termed ‘human dignity’. This term was then adopted as a new form of legal humanism deriving its basis from the concept of sanctity of human life. The recognition of this concept enables an entire set of human rights and obligations to find practical application on a universal basis setting apart from the diverse religious and other philosophical views on human life.

Article Details

How to Cite
BOTES, Marietjie. Sanctity of the human genome as foundation of life. Medical Research Archives, [S.l.], v. 8, n. 9, sep. 2020. ISSN 2375-1924. Available at: <https://journals.ke-i.org/mra/article/view/2220>. Date accessed: 27 oct. 2020. doi: https://doi.org/10.18103/mra.v8i9.2220.
Section
Articles

References

1. Russell, B. The Problems of Philosophy. Oxford University Press. 1997. p.157, 161.
2. The Washington Conference 1941-1942. https://avalon.law.yale.edu/wwii/washc014.asp (accessed 12 July 2020).
3. United Nations. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights. 10 December 1948. https://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/index.html. (accessed 12 July 2020).
4. United Nations. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. 16 December 1966. https://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/CCPR.aspx (accessed 12 July 2020).
5. United Nations. International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. 16 December 1966. https://www.ohchr.org/en/professionalinterest/pages/cescr.aspx (accessed 12 July 2020)
6. United Nations. International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination. 21 December 1965. https://ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/CERD.aspx. (accessed 12 July 2020).
7. United Nations. International Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women. 18 December 1979. https://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/CEDAW.aspx. (accessed 12 July 2020).
8. United Nations. Convention on the Rights of the Child. 20 November 1989. https://www.unicef.org/child-rights-convention (accessed 12 July 2020).
9. United Nations. Convention Against Torture. 10 December 1984. https://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/CAT.aspx. (accessed 13 July 2020).
10. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. Human genome editing: Science, ethics, and governance. 2017. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK447270/ (accessed 13 July 2020).
11. Schües, C. Philosophie des Geborenseins (New edition). 2016. The Routledge Companion to Philosophy of Medicine. ISBN 9781317519843
12. Schütz, A. and Luckmann, T. Strukturen der Lebenswelt. 1997. Vol. 1. Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkamp. https://homepage.univie.ac.at/gabriele.tatzl/lehre/VWien05KSOZ_Praes07Lebenswelt1_Red.pdf (accessed 13 July 2020).
13. Andorno, R. Human Dignity and Human Rights as a Common Ground for Global Bioethics. 2009. J Med Philos 34(3), 223. www.unesco.org.uy/ci/fileadmin (accessed 13 July 2020).
14. Big bang theory is the cosmological theory on the early development of the universe. According to the theory, the universe was originally in an extremely hot and dense state that expanded rapidly. This expansion caused universe to cool and resulted in the present diluted state that continues to expand today.
15. Abiogenesis is the study of how biological life arose from inorganic matter through natural processes and the method by which life arose on this earth. Most amino acids called building blocks of life can form via natural chemical reactions unrelated to life.
16. Theories relating to biological or organic evolution of organism.
17. Descartes, R. Man, and the Universe: The Philosophers of Science (The World’s Great Thinkers), Random House, New York (1st edn.,1947), p.186.
18. “But what then am I? A thing which thinks. What is a thing which thinks? It is a thing which doubts, understands (conceives), affirms, denies, wills, refuses, which also and feel” Rene Descartes, Meditations III. p.79.
19. Wentzel, J.; van Huyssteen, E. and Wiebe, P. In Search of Self: Interdisciplinary Perspectives on Personhood. 2011. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing. ISBN 0802863868, 9780802863867.
20. Carrel, A. The Man, the Unknown. 1935. https://archive.org/stream/ManThe Unknown/alexis-carrel-man-the-unknown-penguin-1948_djvu.txt (accessed 13 July 2020).
21. Cicero, M.T. On the Laws (De Legibus), Book I, section 62, David Fott (trans.). http://www.nlnrac.org/classical/cicero/documents/de-legibus (accessed 13 July 2020).
22. Cicero points out that man is superior in nature to cattle and other beasts since animals do not have thought except for sensual pleasure and this they are impelled by every instinct to seek. But man’s mind is nurtured by study and meditation, he is always either investigating or doing and he is captivated by the pleasure of seeing and hearing. Though man is inclined to sensual pleasure, he is little too susceptible to attractions of pleasure. According to Cicero, sensual pleasure is quite unworthy of the dignity of man and we ought to dispose it and cast it from us. Cicero, M.T. De Officiis Book 1, XXX. Walter Miller (trans.). www.constitution.org/rom/de_officiis.htm (accessed 13 July 2020)
23. Locke stated that the law of nature entails the existence of natural rights to life, liberty and Property. Life because the preservation of mankind requires individuals not to take their own or others live, liberty, because all men are by nature equal and hence possess the equal right to (their) natural freedom, without being subjected to the will or authority of any other man and property because every man has a property in his own person” that entitles him to labour of his body and the work of his hands, ‘such that whatever’ he removes out of the state that nature hath provided and left it in, he hath mixed his labour with and joined to it something that is his own and thereby makes his property”. Locke, J. An Essay Concerning the True Original, Extent and End of Civil Government. Robert Maynard Hutchins (Ed.). Great Books of the Western World, vol. XXXV. Encyclopaedia Britannica. USA. 1971. pp.25-42.
24. Rawls, J. Theory of Justice. 1971. Belknap Press. Cambridge. pp. 3-4.
25. Dworkin, R. Sovereign Virtue: The Theory and Practice of Equality. 2002. Harvard University Press. USA. pp. 287-288.
26. Dwarkin, R. Life’s Dominion. http://web2.slc.qc.ca/sbeaudoin/z_Past%20Pages/Ethics/PDF/Dworkin.pdf. (accessed 13 July 2020).
27. Chng, P. Kant’s Categorical Imperative and The Golden Rule: What’s the Difference? Our Common sense View of Morality Examined. 2018. Medium http://www.qcc.cuny.edu/SocialSciences/ppecorino/default.htm (accessed 13 July 2020).
28. S v Makwanyane and Another (CCT3/94) 1995 (3) SA 391. 6 June 1995
29. Gregg v. Georgia, Proffitt v. Florida, Jurek v. Texas, Woodson v. North Carolina, and Roberts v. Louisiana, 428 U.S. 153 (1976),
30. South Africa. Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996.
31. McAllister, M.C. Human Dignity and Individual Liberty in Germany and the United States as Examined through Each Country's Leading Abortion Cases. Tulsa Journal of Comparative and International Law. Volume 11, Issue 2, Article 4. 2004. https://digitalcommons.law.utulsa.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1207&context=tjcil (accessed 13 July 2020).
32. Kindler v. Canada (Minister of Justice) [1991] 2 SCR 779 Case number: 21321.

Most read articles by the same author(s)

Obs.: This plugin requires at least one statistics/report plugin to be enabled. If your statistics plugins provide more than one metric then please also select a main metric on the admin's site settings page and/or on the journal manager's settings pages.