There is the real, and there is the unreal, or surreal.
The extremely bizarre and fanatical desire for embryonic stem cell research to be the cure for everything (thus making abortion something sweet and pure and well, godly) causes people to simply ignore facts. The fact is, adult stem cell research is where all the benefits are coming from, and can continue to come from.
To those who say "Well, we haven't been given the green light to fully utilize the potential of embryonic stem cell research..." I have to ask, "So, are you in favor of giving the green light to using medical research developed by the Nazis from their torture and murder of human beings? Or, do you think there might be other options, other approaches to research, that don't violate human life or our sensibilities or our humanity?"
Wesley J. Smith on Stem-Cell Research on National Review Online
Thanks to Jeff at Dawn Treader for the link. fb
Saturday, October 16, 2004
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
9 comments:
I have been reading a lot about this lately --as I really didn't know much about it before --and have been amazed at things I have found that so directly contradict what we hear all over the news. I heard a doctor yesturday saying there is rarely success with embrionic cells...and that they have not much hope for Alzheimers since it affects so many areas of the brain...thanks for the link!
Is this the inevitable result of the wish for simple solutions + technology unchecked by morality?
History repeats itself
I ass u me that by the way you said (or paraphrased) "So, are you in favor of giving the green light to using medical research developed by the Nazis from their torture and murder of human beings?" that you are against this act. Why is that, and where does it stop? I mean is stolen money given to charity (to put it metaphorically) a good or bad thing? Could it be that more people are dying in pain now due to our refusal to use such research. Also you said once that morality is/is based on "what is best for people" how does that fit into this?
Yes, stolen money that is given to a charity is a bad thing, because it is wrong! Now don’t go all hypothetical on me, we can both agree on circumstances where it would be OK. But stolen money should be returned to its owner.
Nazi experiments were evil. Is there a specific example of some experimental result from torture you would characterize as “good”? Embryonic stem cell research is too close to that stuff for my comfort; I don’t want the Government funding it.
The end does not justify the means, and it must not be thought that it can. We do so at the risk of becoming what we condemn.
Don't forget the second half of that question: "Or, do you think there might be other options, other approaches to research, that don't violate human life or our sensibilities or our humanity?"
To me that's the real point. Embrionic Stem Cell research as touted by the Kedwards campaign tantamount to faith healing. Meanwhile, real research with real results is ignored.
But, to answer your actual question, giving Nazi death camp medical information any kind of legitimacy is wrong. To the question of "what about the person who will die without this medical knowledge" I say, that is a red herring. What is the main issue you ask? Whether or not it is OK to torture and murder human beings. Since I do not believe it is OK to torture and murder human beings, I don't want to give legitimacy to the results of those activities. And, I don't believe there isn't another way to gain the information. FB
I'm not so sure it is a red herring (thanks for the link) more it is a parallel road - if not perpendicular. It is a question of morality right? The nazis are evil, well yeah, but is information evil. What if there was a rope that was used to kill someone in the hole that you have fallen in? Would you not use the rope to save yourself, or your kids? I mean, you say that to use the information is to legitimize(spelling?) it. But the information was already legitimate (if acurate of course). The means may have been horiffic but the ends do exist. How about the means to a moral society? Does the death of however many people justify that end?
The stem cells wouldn't come from aborted embryos. They would come from embryos from fertility treatments (or through cloning, which is a whole different issue).
Doctors create many embryos during treatments, but only choose a few to implant in the womb. The rest are sometimes frozen, but are eventually discarded.
Just curious, are you against fertility treatments? (and my apologies if I've already asked you this.) I often wonder. I respect the pro-life position, but only if it is consistent. I think very few pro-life folks would oppose fertility treatments even though the battle to conceive results in many more "lost lives" than abortion.
Whoops, posted the wrong link.
Poor_Statue, you did ask that question a few weeks ago back in the comments to the Woman Purees Newborn article.
I wrote two follow up comments, neither of which actually answers your question, but you can read them at commentsWhich is my way of saying, I really don't know...
Post a Comment