We live in an age of scientific breakthroughs. Bioethics came into existence in the second half of the twentieth century as a response to the abuses of science and medicine against man and nature. For the first time in history, humanity had the power to destroy itself through the use of nuclear weapons. Terrific destruction through pollution and wasteful exploitation of natural resources also followed. Worst of all, in terms of human lives lost, was the unleashing of a scientific Culture of Death. This included the “production” of human embryos in laboratories, with less than 10 percent of those embryos actually making it to birth due to the enormous mortality rate of the in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer process. Between 40 and 50 million children also continue to be aborted each year internationally.

Science and scientific discovery are morally neutral until human beings infuse good or bad ethics into the mix by the means they use or the goals they seek. For an act to be moral, the intention and goal (or end) must be good. At the same time, the means to that good end must also be acceptable. Catholics do not share Machiavelli’s view that “the end justifies the means.” 

Here is what the Compendium of the Catechism of the Catholic Church says. “The morality of human acts depends on three sources: the object chosen, either a true or apparent good; the intention of the subject who acts, that is, the purpose for which the subject performs the act; and the circumstances of the act, which include its consequences” (question 367). It is not enough to have good intentions; we must also choose to act well in pursuit of beneficial goals.

A major problem with science today comes from the view that an overwhelming priority, such as fighting COVID-19, creates a justification for putting into place some policies or actions that include moral evils. There never seems to be a lack of justifications once people start looking for them. The slippery slope by which one abuse leads to another is easy to observe in many areas where wrongdoing is accepted in a limited way at first . . . and the evils tolerated or committed only grow worse. Euthanasia, for example, is almost always first legalized for very limited reasons and with promised safeguards against abuses. After a few years abuses tend to multiply, and these abuses are typically used as examples to justify expanding euthanasia, not as evidence that it should be banned again.

We at the NCBC are convinced of the truth of the view expressed by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops that the pandemic is not a good excuse to put aside our ethical and moral principles. We must rather uphold them more strongly, as they will help us to come through these trying times well. If we allow scientific research to be done in an unethical way, or permit patients to be unjustly discriminated against in triage protocols and so on, we shall emerge from this crisis ashamed of what we allowed the response to the pandemic to do to our values. 

A person’s or a society’s moral fiber is tested when there is a crisis. When everything is easy and simple, it is hard to get a good sense of the strength or weakness of individuals or institutions. We are undergoing a great test at present, and we shall see if our ethics will overcome the challenge or be defeated by it. In that sense a struggle is being fought for the soul of America, with science and medicine as the battleground. I pray that vaccine development and other scientific research will not stoop to using cell lines derived from abortions, and I pray that care for the most vulnerable will prevail. That would give us the moral uplift we need to rebuild and improve our lives going forward.

Copyright © 2020, The National Catholic Bioethics Center, Philadelphia, PA. All rights reserved.