At 10:00 AM -0700 7/1/01, Tim May wrote:

<x-flowed>Here's an item about the Feds banning certain types of biological research. More evidence that government is flexing its muscles to interfere in research it has decided is not acceptable...or that it is not controlling for its own purposes. I wonder what Thomas Jefferson, a noted amateur scientist, would have thought of the federal government raiding labs and subpoening records when it decided it wanted to? His cryptography research, for example? So much for the real spirit of the First and Fourth, amongst others.

I discussed several different issues related tot his raid/ban/UFO cult/etc. To separate some of the issues: 1. The basic issue of the constitutionality in these united States of "bans" on research, qua research. Whether the research is about cloning or cryptography or nuclear science, the issue of whether government has the constitutional authority to _ban_ research (as opposed to, say, exploding nuclear weapons or manufacturing nerve agents) is a basic one. 1A: Congress surely has the authority to bar the use of government funding in human cloning. The issue above is not about government funding, but whether they may suppress scientific research by individuals, universities, corporations, and other non-federally funded entities. 2. The issue of how "raids" and "subpoenas" and "visits" and "crackdowns" occur. This is related to the issue of warrants and subpoenas being increasingly easy to obtain, with many judges pre-signing stacks of warrants/orders to be used as LEAs see fit. In the case of this "secret lab" being "visited." there are Fourth Amendment and trespassing issues. 2A: Trespassing on corporate property has long been the norm for regulatory agents, without them seeking specific court approval. OSHA visits corporations (and even private institutions) to check on the height of seat chairs and the placement of safety showers. Fire marshals check for fire extinguishers and safety posters. Perhaps worst of all, IMO, "Child Protective Services" has the apparent right, they claim, to show up at a house or apartment and demand to inspect the premises. These are all cases where the letter of the Fourth Amendment is certainly not being followed, and the spirit is being obliterated. There is very little difference between what the Founders were concerned about, that the King's Men would randomly enter homes looking for seditious materials and troublemakers, and the current situations where the new instances of the King's Men can enter homes, corporations, and other private properties to look for politically incorrect materials. 2B: Copyright and anti-piracy is a related issue. Surprise audits of corporations, for example. (Hey, if I _suspect_ my neighbor has illegally copied a tape I lent him just for viewing, can I demand to inspect his house?) 3. The "chilling effect" issue. These raids and "timeouts" (their language) are used to harass and slow down researchers and other politically incorrect persons. The language is telling: "send a message," "signal our unhappiness," "order a timeout," "a shot across the bow," etc. These raids and subpoenas and "visits" are designed to intimidate in an extra-constitutional way. The Founders would see this as another case of the King's Men throwing their weight around. (We have seen this in crypto, where labs get "visits" by Men in Black from the Office of Export Control, the NSA, etc. We see fewer reports, at least reported here, of researchers being warned that their research could land them in trouble, but it probably still happens. ) 4. Lastly, the science and pseudoscience issue. This UFO cult was visited/raided on the basis of bizarre claims about their desire to clone a dead baby, with some weird mix-in cult beliefs. Where's the scientific credibility that they have the means and knowledge to do a real clone? All of these issues are part of the slippery slope of banning research. We are seeing a move toward an era of Forbidden Knowledge. It started with some limited areas of military research and extended into cryptography in the 60s and 70s (maybe some classifications before the 60s, too). Now it is being extended into biology. Sen. Feinstein wants "bomb-making instructions" banned. Sen. Lieberman has his own list of things he wants banned. My reading of the U.S. Constitution says that government may not ban information or limit the reading (research, thinking) activities of the people. And it says the powers of law enforcement are not to be used outside of legitimate court-ordered actions, with public trials and juries of one's peers. Using law enforcement to "send messages" and "order timeouts" and "fire a shot across the bow" is just not part of our judicial or legislative system. But since the Supreme Court has not even dared to revisit the Second Amendment limitations (of Miller), they are unlikely to face up to this slippery slope of increasing Thought Police activities. --Tim May -- Timothy C. May tcmay@got.net Corralitos, California Political: Co-founder Cypherpunks/crypto anarchy/Cyphernomicon Technical: physics/soft errors/Smalltalk/Squeak/agents/games/Go Personal: b.1951/UCSB/Intel '74-'86/retired/investor/motorcycles/guns

Also see this editorial: http://washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A1963-2001Jun29.html THOUGH STILL publicly wavering on whether to support funding for stem cell research, the Bush administration has begun wading into the tangle of issues that accompany the new reproductive technologies. A health official testifying before Congress last month signaled the administration's support for a bill to ban all human cloning. [...] -Declan

At 9:03 PM -0700 7/1/01, David Honig wrote:

At 11:36 AM 7/1/01 -0700, Tim May wrote:

...

4. Lastly, the science and pseudoscience issue. This UFO cult was visited/raided on the basis of bizarre claims about their desire to clone a dead baby, with some weird mix-in cult beliefs. Where's the scientific credibility that they have the means and knowledge to do a real clone?

A baby that died of a genetic defect well before the age of reproduction. They need a serious education in evolution...

Sure. But not a raid by Big Brother. This is the crux. --Tim May -- Timothy C. May tcmay@got.net Corralitos, California Political: Co-founder Cypherpunks/crypto anarchy/Cyphernomicon Technical: physics/soft errors/Smalltalk/Squeak/agents/games/Go Personal: b.1951/UCSB/Intel '74-'86/retired/investor/motorcycles/guns

On Sun, 1 Jul 2001, Tim May wrote:

Despite warnings from scientists who say such practices are fraught with potential health risks, some Raelians have built a secret U.S. laboratory and vowed to create the first human clone this year.

It would be fairly interesting to hear what those health risks are. If they refer to risks to the people doing the experiments, I can't see any beyond what normal parenting would bring. If they instead refer to the babies being born/built, then we're seeing one serious extension of the concept of "unborn babies". The GE scare has religious morality, ignorance and fear of the unknown written all over it.

Food and Drug Administration agents visited the lab recently and ordered any human cloning experiments to cease.

Makes one wonder whether babies are Food or Drug. Just as one has a hard time telling which one religious sects are, Alcohol, Tobacco or Firearms.

Oooh, scary! A "secret lab"! What, all labs are supposed to be public, registering with the government? (There is no evidence the lab is using more dangerous chemicals than are normally found in any hardware store, for example, so "public safety" cannot be a justification.)

But see, once they've done with cloning, they'll crave for more. Soon they'll be doing gene splicing and whatnot. Then we'll have a swarm of newly born \bermenschen running around, wreaking havoc. The final days are coming, there will be Judgment...

Is there no consideration of common sense, or are prosecutors just flunkouts in science who can't separate speech acts from actual violations of the law?

Actually I think the law prohibits research targeted at cloning in addition to cloning itself. All the same, it's bad law.

The issue of whether human cloning research is so intrinsically sensitive or dangerous that it requires preemptive raids and fishing expeditions is a topic worth discussing.

The hysteria surrounding gene manipulation is weird all over. I've never even seen proper assessments of threats beyond the problems created by large monocultures of genetically engineered plant species, the effects on third world economies of patented crops and allergic reactions to unexpected foreign proteines in foodstuffs. This is hardly the sort of stuff to cause one to reach for the gun, and could be dealt with on the market. The only real threat I can see in cloning humans is the risk of fucking the baby up for good, and somehow it is quite difficult to see a) how that would happen if you're just doing a competent clone job and b) how one justifies preemption of the research since the mistakes have yet to be made.

<>

"Resurrect"? That is one serious piece of loaded lingo -- the next thing they'll be doing now is slipping in spiritual advice.

<< Even if a law were passed in the United States, it could prove difficult to enforce because cloning operations are easy to hide.

It seems that they're making scientists into the bad guys. Science flunkouts indeed, having a fit of envy. They really should understand that in a free country, researchers have no reason to explicitly hide their operations, or to sneak around cloning babies. "Are you, or have you ever been, a Biologist?" Sampo Syreeni, aka decoy, mailto:decoy@iki.fi, gsm: +358-50-5756111 student/math+cs/helsinki university, http://www.iki.fi/~decoy/front