spacer.gif (842 bytes) News Cuttings

If you are unfamiliar with this subject, click here first for a brief introduction.

Click here for more articles


spacer.gif (842 bytes)

The Gazette (Montreal)
Wed 26 Jan 2000

Religion at heart of U.S. lawsuit

No one was more surprised than Steven Druker when, in 1996, his synagogue in Fairfield, Iowa, backed his bid to sue the U.S. government over genetically modified food.

A wealthy member of the congregation was so moved when he heard Druker's religious objections to such food that he provided seed money to get the landmark lawsuit off the ground.

Since then, Druker, a lawyer-turned-activist who is in Montreal to attend a United Nations-sponsored conference on genetically modified products and the environment, has managed to rally the support of religious leaders, not just within the Jewish community, but also those representing Catholics, Protestants and
Muslims.

Along with a coalition of scientists and consumer advocates, Druker and his religious supporters are forcing a U.S. court to rule on the controversial issue of genetically modified food.

The lawsuit, which concluded hearings last July and is now in the hands of a judge, is aimed at forcing U.S. regulators to set higher standards for testing the potential impacts of genetically modified food on human health.

It is also demanding that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration - the agency in charge of safeguarding what Americans eat - compel manufacturers to clearly label foods altered by biotechnology.

More specifically, Druker argues that by not telling consumers what genetically engineered ingredients are in their food, regulators are violating a constitutional right to religious freedom that is protected in U.S. law.

In launching his legal challenge, Druker has singlehandedly opened up a broader debate within religious circles about the ethical principles that should guide society's use of a powerful tool such as genetic engineering.

``I really believe that any religious individual who understood the full facts about genetic engineering would develop great concern about what's going on,'' he said in an interview.

As a devout Jew who needs to avoid foods with substances from non-kosher animals, Druker says he fears the day when genes from pigs, shellfish or insects might be genetically spliced into fruits or vegetables, resulting in the reshuffling of their genetic code.

``As consumers, we have the right to know what we're eating so that we can freely practice our religious beliefs.''

From Druker's point of view, this alteration through what's known as recombinant-DNA technology not only destroys a product's kosher quality; it defies ``the integrity of a species'' - a religious principle founded in Jewish law.

``To my knowledge there aren't any genetically modified foods on the market right now that contain genes from non-kosher species,'' he said.

``But I and our rabbi plaintiffs still believe that just the recombinant-DNA technology itself and this unnatural transferring of genes from very distant species, through force and disruption into another species, is far away from the original plan of life.''

What's more, he argues, because humans already have the capacity to improve food and create a wide variety of edible crops through traditional plant breeding, genetically engineering food is morally unjustifiable.

That's especially true, he said, since there are no substantial indications that countries suffering from malnutrition and starvation will benefit from the technology.

``We have to learn that there are some limits. And when the genetic engineers claim that recombinant-DNA splicing techniques are just basically a simple extension of sexual reproduction through God-given pathways, I say no. That is morally wrong.''

While he characterizes the genetic engineering of food as a reckless and irresponsible use of biotechnology, Druker is not willing to dismiss genetic engineering altogether, especially when it comes to the technology's potential to save human lives.

``Jewish law does allow for distinctions. For example, there's a general principle that if life is at stake, then you can even break the laws of the Sabbath or any of the strictest laws. So if it means transgressing the laws of the Sabbath for a doctor to go drive across town to save somebody's life, it's his duty to do
that. But if it's not a clear case of life being in danger, the basic set of laws should be followed.''

At 53, Druker, a onetime corporate lawyer in California, is an unlikely and somewhat reluctant crusader. He acquired his interest in - and knowledge of - biotechnology in the early 1990s while researching a book on science, ethics and religion.

``The more I learned, the more I got concerned,'' he said.

His initial worries were not just based on religious concerns. Druker says he was also driven by the realization that U.S. regulators routinely approve genetically modified foods without adequate safety testing.

He approached public-interest groups, hoping they would take up the legal fight, but got little support. In 1996, Druker finally decided to abandon his book, live on his savings and devote his energies full time to fighting the U.S. government.

In addition to the donation from the benefactor at his synagogue, Druker raised about $50,000 for his cause, most of which went to pay for a team of public-interest lawyers in Washington, D.C., who are now working for free.

** Among mainstream environmental groups that share Druker's goals for adequate safety testing and mandatory labeling of genetically modified food, there is little support for his spiritual views. Indeed, Druker's strongest critics accuse him of exploiting religious positions based on unscientific and untrue information.

``I, too, have profound feelings about the sanctity of life and the moral responsibility of humans to exercise strong stewardship of the planet,'' said Val Giddings, a vice-president of BIO, an association grouping some of the largest biotech companies in the United States.

``I am also a passionate and fervent environmentalist myself and I am outraged that activists have presumed to occupy the moral high ground with positions that in fact will do incalculable damage to the environment and to humanity.''

 

spacer.gif (842 bytes)

Home / Overview / News Cuttings / Other Related Articles  / Contact