Does human life matter simply because it is human? That was the question posed to about 50 people Thursday night by an attorney opposed to human cloning.

In 101 Carver Hall, Wesley Smith challenged the audience to devote profound thought to what he considers “the greatest question of the 21st century.”

Smith, a senior fellow at the Discovery Institute of Seattle and an attorney and consultant for the International Task Force on Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide, said answering yes to that question can lead to a morally sound choice and a future in biomedical issues.

However, answering no to this question is agreeing with bioethics, and the question then becomes what makes a human life a moral value, he said.

In the lecture, “A Consumer’s Guide to Brave New World: Stem Cells, Human Cloning and the Sanctity of Human Life,” Smith explained the two different approaches to banning human cloning that have been proposed.

A full ban, which Smith supports, outlaws all forms of human cloning.

A reproductive ban, however, would only ban cloning that results in human life but would support cloning for biomedical research purposes.

Several audience members left the speech before the 80 minute lecture was completed. Smith asked for questions from the audience. Several audience members were frustrated that only one side of the argument was presented during the lecture. A student questioned statistics and facts Smith presented.

Stem cell research was of major interest to audience members. One suggested that donating stem cells or an unfertilized egg for stem cell research, was similar to a plasma donation. Smith agreed, because both are sold for money.

“Its time that the discussion of ethics of [human cloning] get out of the ivory tower and into the public square,” Smith said.