<$BlogRSDURL$> abbr, acronym { cursor: help; font-style: normal; font-weight:bold; color: #2a548d; /*border-bottom: 1px solid; */ }

Eminent Domain Stuff

New London Update (2/24/06)
Coverage of the Rally at New London's City Hall (w/ pics)

Tuesday, June 08, 2004


Stem Cells Back In The News

Drudge has linked to a story indicating that 58 Senators have signed a letter sent to President Bush urging him to rethink his stance on embryonic stem cell research. They claim, as many do, that such avenues of science hold the key to curing diseases such as Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s, etc., etc. Do they really? Obviously no one knows. The issue we must grapple with is the very one that Bush himself (via his spokesman) points out:
"The president remains committed to exploring the promise of stem cell research but at the same time continues to believe strongly that we should not cross a fundamental moral line by funding or encouraging the destruction of human embryos," Lisaius said.

"The president does not believe that life should be created for the sole purpose of destroying it. He does believe we can explore the promise and potential of stem cell research using the existing lines of stem cells."

Are we willing, as a society, to create human life for the express and sole purpose of extracting some desired material from it? That, my friends, is exactly the issue here. We cannot talk about ‘curing’ diseases and forget that we are destroying human life in the process. This argument would even be a morally contentious one if anyone could say with absolute certainty that we would find a cure for a given disease through this research. Then it would be the old, “Would you be willing to commit one horrible act of cruelty on an innocent child if that action would relieve all other suffering in the world forever?” But that’s not even the case here. What proponents of embryonic stem cell research are asking our society is this, “Would you be willing to kill the most innocent human being for a chance to see if we can manage to cure a few diseases?”

Don’t be mislead, that absolutely is the question being considered here. Creating an embryo in a dish for the purpose of destroying it in order to obtain stem cells is not, as some would say, related to abortion…it is far, far worse. At least in the case of abortion the -shiver- unwanted child is typically conceived accidentally. Can people not see the absolute evil inherent in purposefully creating a child for no other reason than to use it for research? It boggles my mind and sickens my heart.


Here's some news from The Scientist about CA's upcoming ballot initiative concerning Stem Cell research funding.

Update 2:

And here's what Laura Bush has to say.

Update 3:

The Scientist has an article out about stem cell's potential (or perhaps lack thereof) to treat Alzheimer's. I think it's fair to say that when it comes to predicted advances in any field of science or medicine you can take even the conservative estimates, take only 10% to that and still overstate the potential. I'm willing to be pleasantly surprised but the question is: Are we willing to pay the moral price of 'obtaining' embryonic stem cells only to have our hopes disappointed, leaving us nothing to show for that horrible price?

Update 4:

Annie over at After Abortion has a great post on embryonic stem cells, the Reagans and even adult stem cells. She makes some great points. Here's a bit:

Adult stem (AS) and cord-blood stem cells successfully have treated leukemia, anemia and lymphoma and have restored dead heart- and spinal cord- tissues. Over 3,500 transplants worldwide from these cells culled from the pancreas, muscles, corneas, bone marrow and neurons have proven effective. ES cells have not.
Give it a read.


This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?