The Final Word on Genetic Engineering?
Article Archive - 21/10/2003
Hello everyone.
I recently appeared before a government Select Committee following a submission on the Human Assisted Reproductive Technology bill that is on its way to becoming legislation in NZ. This law relates to setting guidelines for genetic engineering of embryos to create designer babies, human cloning, etc. This on the eve of the lifting of the moratorium on genetic engineering (GE) in NZ. I therefore wish to draw your attention to an understanding of one of the basic issues in the debate that has been substantially overlooked.
The agenda of the late 20th century and the early part of this century is seemingly set by science, which is now substantially corporately owned. The bureaucrats who support this regime, who are largely the indoctrinated product of a university education and who espouse us to "move ahead with science" may be better called "technocrats". They have the public so focussed on the apparent "need" to move forward with science, while cultivating the underlying fear that we will be "left behind" without science, that the public has become unaware that there are other options in life. Most of the options presented and debated in public forums are "science says this" or "science can do that", such that the technocrats have drawn public focus from God and individual responsibility. While we remain on the playing field of science, win, lose, or draw we are thus still playing the technocrats' game.
As a teenager I marvelled at the "progress" science could bring. I was in love with science. I wanted to be a scientist. I spent 4 years at University pursuing this aspiration. Yet somewhere in my heart I always held the reservation, "I hope we will be responsible with what we learn." I considered the moral implications of cloning and questioned how society would come to grips with these implications, as surely science could not progress without the support of society.
As an adult, I look back on the last 25 years since that time and wonder when it was that the scales tipped from society controlling science to science controlling society. Perhaps I am naïve to consider that society has ever been in control of science. Nonetheless, as I look back two notable events in the last 3 years impress me: a sheep was cloned and human genes were inserted into cows to "improve" the quality of their milk and society never had a word to say about it. I realise that it is no longer a case of wondering how we will be responsible before we "cross the line" because it seems the line is already far behind us and we, as a collective group, weren't included in the decision.
To give another example, were we responsible when we dropped the first nuclear bomb on Japan? By my reckoning, nearly 60 years have passed and we still have not learnt to be responsible for nuclear waste in peace time, let alone its killing power in war time. The wool has well and truly been pulled over our eyes if we ever thought that corporate or government sponsored science will be responsible.
Good science is expensive. Isaac Newton spent 20 years of his life in the 1600's perfecting a revolutionary branch of maths so he could describe his famous Laws of Motion. Faraday in the 1800's spent a similar period of time just collecting copper and making wire before he could even conduct his experiments with electricity. Any pioneer has a price to pay for their effort. Today, pioneering research requires the latest equipment, facilities and a large team of people, all of which must be funded. In fact today little large scale research is conducted without some major investor, typically a corporate body, who hopes to have a product to sell at the end of the day to get their money back, if not make a profit. Make no mistake, no matter what the intention of the scientist, such research is driven by profit, not social responsibility.
In my consideration of genetic research I have concluded that this science is not immoral, but rather amoral, for there is no consideration of moral virtue. Genetic research is founded upon the precept that DNA creates life, when the truth is that God has created all life. There is no moral defense for the scientists who may sincerely claim to believe in God by saying, "Well, God created DNA." DNA does not create or dictate life; life creates and dictates DNA and life was created by God. We are not the mere product of a bunch of chemicals. Until this fundamental truth is acknowledged by scientists, all genetic research is effectively amoral and atheistic.
Science says DNA dictates the body structure, but the truth, as we know from our studies in Body Electronics, is that the morphogenetic field, which exists as dictated by consciousness, dictates the structure of the body, including the structure and function of the DNA. The DNA cannot be permanently genetically modified and supported by life where consciousness does not change. Genetic manipulation of DNA is no more than another attempt to manipulate outer energies. DNA must eventually conform to consciousness. There is only one valid and effective means of manipulating life (if that word can be used at all) and that is by the power of consciousness or through direct communion with God.
It is thus my belief that all genetically altered life forms will ultimately "wither and die on the vine". Dolly the cloned sheep is a fine example. Dolly seemed like a perfect clone but died within 2 years riddled with arthritis and other degenerative diseases that were the hallmark of old age. Her DNA literally fell to pieces. This does not mean action on our part is not required since each of us is part of the collective consciousness that determines the collective morphogenetic field of the universe. Persistent inaction is an abrogation of responsibility and one's position in the grand scheme of life that relegates one to Apathy and the gradual descent into Unconsciousness.
The technocrats have over the years gradually manipulated governments (and public opinion) to blindly pass laws that effectively make it "legal" (if not moral) for man to play God by creating the DNA of his choice. Yet the science of genetic engineering is really a tribute to the ignorance of man and his arrogant egotism in believing he can permanently manipulate life by tampering with genetic codes. The science of GE can thus be likened to an attempt to build a wooden fireplace or make ice cubes inside a hot oven - it is doomed to failure.
Be this as it may, science is not the enemy, but it is a false idol. Consider it as a graven image seeking to be alike unto God and His works, but clearly not God. Science is no more than a test for each of us. Can we pass the test of identification with intellectualism (the level of Grief on the scale of emotions) and its intoxicating logic or can we not? Please consider, the whole time one debates the pros and cons of science and its activities, one is not attuned to God and doing His Laws. The great need of today is not to consider whether or not to move ahead with science, but to move ahead with God.
Science, GE in particular, invites us to consider whether or not life is perfect. In fact it proclaims that life is not perfect, since science claims it can improve life. I believe that part of the Divine Design is to seek perfection by recognising perfection, not by seeking imperfection and trying to eliminate it. Perfection is not the absence of imperfection, because everything is already perfect; the task is for each of us to but see it.
To be very blunt, GE is not about improving society or life. No matter how sincere some researchers and supporters may be they are simply operating on the basis of a lie. GE is about money, power, ego, control and intellectual curiosity. Morality is not a part of it.
It therefore behoves all of us to put forth our physical and spiritual effort to prevent further atrocity against life by allowing the pursuit of Godless science to preclude our right to move ahead with God.
On the physical level at this pivotal moment in NZ history, tell your MP TODAY that GE research must stop in NZ NOW and that our food and environment must be protected from GE contamination forever. You may consider the popular call for a 5 year extension on the GE Moratorium a small and practical step in the right direction.
On a spiritual level, disconnect yourself from the entrapments of logic and forget the alluring calls of science so that you may move into a loving clarity on the understanding of the sanctity of life in all its forms and pour your blessings into life that life may bless you.
In Love, Light and Perfection,
"I AM"
Graham Bennett
Subscribe to the Healthy Being mailing list here.
Or, read other archived articles, using the navigation links at the top right corner of this page.
