It’s deplorable to think (and worse to accept) that health insurance is stymieing perhaps the most groundbreaking scientific achievement of this century: understanding the human genome.

Yet it is. Fear of losing coverage dissuades people from investigating their inner workings, despite the benefits to health such revelations could bring. They are afraid this information would be used against them.

Normally, it is fear of the unknown that paralyzes. With genetics, fear of the known stands in progress’ path. In this country, where medical science can arguably perform miracles, many feel safer in ignorance about their peril.

Because what they do not know, cannot have their insurance revoked.

This is the backdrop for the Genetic Information Non-Discrimination Act, which passed 95-0 through the U.S. Senate last week. Sen. Olympia Snowe, R-Maine, is the bill’s primary sponsor; she has been incubating it on Capitol Hill since 1997. It now appears fast-tracked for House approval today, after its wandering journey.

Nothing further, in our opinion, should stand in its way toward enactment.

Imagine a world where serious diseases or maladies, rooted inside DNA, are diagnosed or perhaps prevented through early genetic identification. Or where mankind’s collective approaches and understandings about health and medicine are revolutionized by this new knowledge.

Gains from knowing ourselves genetically far outweigh insurance concerns. Information is power, and in this crucial instance, it is ethically – and only right – for Congress to ensure this power is not abused.

Two subtexts from this legislation also resonate:

• In stark fashion, this bill details the iron grip of health insurance. We so dread the loss of coverage, we’ll choose to ignore information that could improve our health, and leave it buried within our code.

But ignorance of health risks only raises future costs for care and insurance premiums when they manifest. This is a systemic failure, which could be alleviated by promoting early identification through genetics.

It should become as common as other smart early warning practices, such as tests for breast or colon cancer.

• And, in a bit of bluster, Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., called GINA the first “equal rights” legislation of this century. Kennedy is hyperbolic, but not wrong – although this legislation doesn’t guarantee rights, it does create a stirring precedent for future, probing discussions about genetics.

More than human health depends on genes. Behavioral problems, sexual orientation and many disorders and syndromes are thought, or proven, to be genetic; as mankind delves into itself, the issues will be unraveled.

Enactment of GINA would aid these advancements, by declaring individuals should be judged on what they can control, like the content of their character.

Not on what they cannot, like the makeup of their genes.