Race, Protestantism, and Reproduction in the United States

The messaging of genomics in the U.S. involves two American, mainline Protestant ideals:  human progress and common identity.  According to a 2001 article in The Nation, international public relations firm Burson-Marsteller advised "bioindustries [to] stop trying to be their own advocates.”  The 1997 memo recommended corporations cooperate to produce “symbols eliciting hope, satisfaction, caring and self-esteem.”  The Genomic Revolution represents such cooperation.  The AMNH exhibit went on international tour, appearing first (2002) in Raleigh (the epicenter of the “New South”). Out of the six “Major Sponsors,” three were directly biotechnological and two were one step removed.  Perhaps taking a cue from reports of a public wary of genetic discrimination, the exhibit reiterated that humans share 99.9% of their genes. “We’re all related in a way because we all have DNA,” read The Gene Scene, a brochure for school-age visitors.  Museum planners sought to convey that genetics is responsible for not only “what makes you you” and “what makes me me” but also what makes us us. One multicolored display explained: “Scientists have confirmed, as they long suspected, that there is no genetic or biological basis for race”—“THE ONLY RACE IS THE HUMAN RACE.” This was reiterated in the exhibit’s epilogue, which reminded viewers that genetics proves the “fundamental unity of all life.” This story of common identity through scientific progress is pervasive.  Through genetics, humans will be able To Know Ourselves, the title of a 1996 U.S. Department of Energy booklet. At their 2000 news conference, Collins and Clinton made use of the unifying rhetoric. By glimpsing “our own instruction book,” Americans may know we’re all in this together. By learning the code of life, humans may emerge as a “common humanity.” The headline announcing a 2003 exhibit sponsored by Baylor College of Medicine and the Houston Museum of Natural Science, sums up the hope: “The Secret of Life Revealed in New Exhibition.” Burson-Marsteller may declare this money well spent.  The story is an impressive piece of symbolic stitch-witchery.  My presentation involves a different take:  stories of degeneration and racial difference are intertwined with the dominant narrative of progress and commonality.  From disability to immigration to miscegenation, patterns from the past remain.  “Hope” thus requires also attention to fear and division in the genomic age.