首页
外语
计算机
考研
公务员
职业资格
财经
工程
司法
医学
专升本
自考
实用职业技能
登录
考研
This election year, the debate over cloning technology has become a circus—and hardly anybody has noticed the gorilla hiding in
This election year, the debate over cloning technology has become a circus—and hardly anybody has noticed the gorilla hiding in
admin
2010-05-05
88
问题
This election year, the debate over cloning technology has become a circus—and hardly anybody has noticed the gorilla hiding in the tent. Even while President Bush has, endorsed throwing scientists in jail to stop "reckless experiments", it’s just possible the First Amendment will protect researchers who want to perform cloning research.
Dr. Leon Kass, the chairman of the President’s Council on Bioethics, would like to keep that a secret. "I don’t want to encourage such thinking," he said. But the notion that the First Amendment creates a "right to research" has been around for a long time, and Kass knows it. In 1977, four eminent legal scholars—Thomas Emerson, Jerome Barton, Walter Berns and Harold P. Green—were asked to testify before the House Subcommittee on Science, Technology and Space. At the time, there was alarm in the country over recombinant DNA. Some people feared clones, designer babies, a plague of superbacteria. The committee wanted to know if the federal government should, or could, restrict the science. "Certainly the overwhelming tenor of the testimony was in favor of protecting it," Barron, who now teaches at George Washington University, recalls.
Berns, a conservative political scientist, was forced to agree. He didn’t like this conclusion, be muse he feared the consequences of tinkering with nature, but even after consulting with Kass before his testimony, he told Congress that "the First Amendment protected this kind of research." Today, he believes it protects cloning experiments as well. Law-review articles written at the time supported Berns, and so would a report issued by Congress’s Office of Technology Assessment (O. T.A). But the courts never got the chance to face the fight-to-research issue squarely. An oversight body called the Recombinant DNA Advisory Committee, formed by the National Institutes of Health, essentially allowed science to police itself. So the discussion was submerged. Until now.
Why legal scholars would defend the right to research is hardly mysterious. The founding fathers passionately defended scientific and academic freedom, and the Supreme Court has traditionally had a high regard for it. But why would the right to read, write and speak as you please extend to the right to experiment in the lab?
Neoconservatives like Kass have emphasized the need to maintain a fixed conception of human nature. But the O.T.A. directly addressed this in a 1981 report. "Even if the rationale.., were expanded to include situations where knowledge threatens fundamental cultural values about the nature of man, control of research for such a reason probably would not be constitutionally permissible."
The government can restrict speech if it can prove a "compelling interest," like public safety or national security. But courts have set that bar very high. Unlike, say, an experiment that releases smallpox into the wind to study how it spreads, which could be banned, embryo research presents no readily apparent danger to public health or security. And if that’s the case, scientists who wish to create stem cells by cloning might have a new source of succor: the U.S. Constitution.
选项
A、identical.
B、similar.
C、complementary.
D、opposite.
答案
D
解析
本题问Kass和O.T.A.对克隆研究的态度怎样。第二段提到"But the notion that the First Amendment creates a ’right to research’...and Kass knows it"可知第一修正案对克隆研究有保护作用,但是"Dr.Leon Kass...would like to keep that a secret"可知Kass不想让人们知道有法律在保护克隆研究,也就是说他不赞成对克隆的研究加以保护;而第三段提到Berns承认第一修正案保护克隆,又提到"Law-review articles...supported Berns,and so would a report issued by...(O.T.A.)".也就是说O.T.A.支持Betas的看法,即第一修正案支持克隆研究。而且第五段"But the O.T.A. directly addressed...Even if the rationale...control of research...would not be constitutionally permissible"也明确表明O.T.A.反对对克隆研究的控制。因此"(两者的观点)相反的"正确。相同的;相似的;互补的:均错。
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/BH44777K
0
考研英语一
相关试题推荐
Despitehelpingtorecordevents,photoscoulddamageourmemories.Researchersfoundpeoplewhotakepictureshave【C1】________r
Despitehelpingtorecordevents,photoscoulddamageourmemories.Researchersfoundpeoplewhotakepictureshave【C1】________r
AftervisitingWidenerUniversityandlearningaboutitsprogramrequiring300hoursofcommunityserviceinthesurroundingpoo
Nowadays,amateurphotographyhasbecomeatroublingissue.Citizensofrichcountrieshavegotusedtobeingwatchedbyclosed-
Nowadays,amateurphotographyhasbecomeatroublingissue.Citizensofrichcountrieshavegotusedtobeingwatchedbyclosed-
Nowadays,amateurphotographyhasbecomeatroublingissue.Citizensofrichcountrieshavegotusedtobeingwatchedbyclosed-
Parentsshouldnotassumethatyoungchildren’snaturallanguageabilitieswillleadtotruegrown-uplanguageskillswithout
Writeanessaybasedonthefollowingbarchart.Inyourwriting,youshould1)interpretthechart,and2)giveyourcomments.
Writeanessaybasedonthefollowingchart.Inyourwriting,youshould1)interpretthechart,and2)giveyourcomments.You
随机试题
计算机能直接执行的程序可以是汇编语言编写的程序。
近视眼表现为远视眼易导致
A.磺胺类B.糖皮质激素C.门冬酰胺酶D.维生素CE.青霉素和甲氨蝶呤合用,能降低其对甲氨蝶呤的敏感性,限制甲氨蝶呤的骨髓毒性的是()。
认股权证自上市之日起存续时间为4个月以上18个月以下。()
位于县城的某化妆品厂为增值税一般纳税人,主要生产化妆品以及普通护肤品。该化妆品厂2016年3月、4月发生下列经济业务:(1)3月购进业务:从甲生产企业购进已税香水精,取得增值税专用发票,注明价款120万元、增值税20.4万元。(2)3月材料、产品领用情
泥石流的主要发生原因是()。
就测定方式而言,依据误差对阈限进行间接测量的方法是
以身高作为刑事责任能力与民事行为能力判断标准的朝代为()朝。
若有定义和语句int**pp,*p,a=10,b=20;pp=&p;p=&a;p=&b;printf("%d,%d\n",*p,**pp);则输出结果是()
A、Hedidn’tgetthetickets.B、Theplaywastoodull.C、Thetheaterwastoocrowded.D、Hemissedthebeginningoftheplay.A
最新回复
(
0
)