Impact of Christian Ethics on Biotechnological Resilience within the 21st Century
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.47611/jsrhs.v12i3.4643Keywords:
biotechnology, religion, christianityAbstract
Research into varying forms of scientific research and study involve a variety of different ethical and social perspectives in order to comprehensively understand the limits and boundaries the research can be implemented into general public usage. Within the field of biotechnology, there is an abundance of diverse responses due to its ability to alter a being's body both presently and within future generations, most of which emerging from religious denominations. In particular, Christian sects have shown a certain hesitancy towards scientific advancement and ideologies that violate their own beliefs, a pattern which has been illustrated since the 16 and 17th centuries with the introduction of the Scientific Revolution. However, different Christian branches may view the implementation of biotechnology with a more beneficial perspective than others, which is why it is important to understand whether the continued advancement of biotechnology is resilient against the ethical values of Christianity within contemporary society. The need of biotechnological advancement to develop resiliency towards the negative connotations Christian communities hold may see it fit to decrease over time due to an increasing popularity to view science as an ability to aid humans in different illnesses within younger generations. However, opportunities for Christian communities to learn scientific concepts is still important since efforts to successfully introduce the advantages of biotechnology may be obsolete if religious communities wish to adhere to their own beliefs.
Downloads
References or Bibliography
Afolabi, M. O. S. (2019). Are Radical Genetic Enhancements a Type of Contemporary Edenic
Deception? American Journal of Bioethics, 19(7), 53–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/15265161.2019.1618963
Danielson, D., & Graney, C. M. (2014). The Case Against Copernicus. Scientific American,
(1), 72–77. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26039736
Davis, J. J. (2004). Christian Reflections on the Genetic Revolution. Evangelical Review of
Theology, 28(1), 65–79.
https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=asn&AN=12284281&site=ehost-live
Delkeskamp-Hayes, C. (2012). Rethinking the Christian Bioethics of Human Germ Line Genetic
Engineering: A Postscript Against the Grain of Contemporary Distortions. Christian Bioethics: Non-Ecumenical Studies in Medical Morality, 18(2), 219–230. https://doi.org/10.1093/cb/cbs015
DiSilvestro, R. (2012). Three Christian Arguments Against Germline Engineering. Christian
Bioethics: Non-Ecumenical Studies in Medical Morality, 18(2), 201–218. https://doi.org/10.1093/cb/cbs019
Evans, J. H., & Hudson, K. (2007). Religion and Reproductive Genetics: Beyond Views of
Embryonic Life? Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 46(4), 565–581. http://www.jstor.org/stable/4622009
Grant, E. (1962). Late Medieval Thought, Copernicus, and the Scientific Revolution. Journal of
the History of Ideas, 23(2), 197–220. https://doi.org/10.2307/2708155
Ishak, M. S. B., & Haneef, S. S. S. (2014). Reproductive Technology: A Critical Analysis of
Theological Responses in Christianity and Islam. Zygon: Journal of Religion & Science, 49(2), 396–413. https://doi.org/10.1111/zygo.12097
Kalidasan, V., & Das, K. T. (2022). Playing God? Religious Perspectives on Manipulating the
Genome. Journal of Religion & Health, 61(4), 3192–3218. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10943-022-01497-6
Lastochkina, M. (2012). Exactly How Should Christians Be Uneasy About Germ-line Genetic
Engineering? A Response to David Jones. Christian Bioethics: Non-Ecumenical Studies
in Medical Morality, 18(2), 163–170. https://doi.org/10.1093/cb/cbs020
Longest, K. C., & Smith, C. (2011). Conflicting or Compatible: Beliefs About Religion and
Science Among Emerging Adults in the United States. Sociological Forum, 26(4), 846–869. http://www.jstor.org/stable/41330898
Mandela, N. (1994). Chapter 6. In Long Walk to Freedom (pp. 13–14). Little Brown.
Rahill, G. J., Ganapati, N. E., Joshi, M., Bristol, B., Molé, A., Jean-Pierre, A., Dionne, A.,
& Benavides, M. (2016). In their own words: Resilience among Haitian survivors of the 2010 earthquake. Journal of Health Care for the Poor and Underserved, 27(2), 580–603. https://doi.org/10.1353/hpu.2016.0100
Reiss, M. J. (2009). The Relationship between Evolutionary Biology and Religion. Evolution,
(7), 1934–1941. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40306267
Rheeder, R. A. L. (2014). An exploration of synthetic biology: A preliminary Christian ethical
assessment of the advantages and disadvantages of synthetic biology. In Die Skriflig, 48(2), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.4102/ids.v48i2.722
Wallace, W. A. (1983). Galileo’s Science and the Trial of 1633. The Wilson Quarterly (1976-),
(3), 154–164. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40256655
Watling, T. (2006). ‘Singing the Lord’s Song in a Strange Land’: A ‘Bio-Ethnography’ of
Christianity and Genetic Engineering in Scotland. Ecotheology: Journal of Religion, Nature & the Environment, 11(1), 76–102. https://doi.org/10.1558/ecot.2006.11.1.76
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
Copyright (c) 2023 Ava Miklos
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Copyright holder(s) granted JSR a perpetual, non-exclusive license to distriute & display this article.