Jivin J’s Life Links 2-10-09
by JivinJ
You might get an intelligent rehearsal of both sides of an argument in a bar, but if it touches on feminism, Israel or the environment, the last place you’d look for it is on campus.
As if to make the point, the Halifax Chronicle Herald records the reactions of Lesley-Anne Steeleworthy, chairwoman of the board at SMU’s women’s centre. The lecture topic, she declared, was “anti-choice” and offensive on “a number of levels.”Not just Ruba’s thoughts you notice, the topic itself. How dare he bring it up?
Researchers are rejoicing over President Barack Obama’s anticipated lifting of the eight-year ban on embryonic stem cell research imposed by his predecessor, President George W. Bush…..
Stem cell research received a big boost in January, when the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved the first-ever human trial using embryonic stem cells as a medical treatment.
Isn’t it amazing how a government agency approved a clinical trial using embryonic stem cells before Barack Obama lifted the ban on embryonic stem cell research. Oh wait, embryonic stem cell research isn’t banned at all.
I’m often asked as a mother of a child with type 1 diabetes who would benefit from a cure found though stem cell research – but also as a pro-life conservative – what my position is on stem cell research.
I think there’s a good case for pro-life conservatives to support embryonic stem cell research…..
As long as there are excess embryos as a result of IVF – ones that otherwise will be discarded – let’s have something good come of them.
Let’s see if they hold the key to curing the suffering of others, rather than just throwing them away. Let’s make a positive statement about the worth of each embryo, even the discarded ones.
This obviously isn’t the thought process of someone who clearly recognizes human embryos as valuable living human beings. Would she make the same argument for individuals who are on death row or in hospice? They’re just going to die anyway – let’s have something good come of them.
Further evidence of Cary’s less than pro-life thought process is evident in her attempt to make an argument by comparison:
If you ask me, one of the most pro-life things you can do (other than adopting a child) is to donate blood and sign up to be an organ donor. So if you’re opposed to embryonic stem cell research, think of it this way: If my friend gets killed in a car crash, one of the best outcomes from that tragedy would be if he or she had signed up to be an organ donor.
It doesn’t mean I’m glad my friend died. It doesn’t mean I’m in favor of car crashes.
Do you see how her comparision assumes the embryos are already dead? Her comparison might work if her friend was intentionally killed in a car accident and the individual who killed him wants permission to experiment on his organs.
[HT: Mary Meets Dolly; photo of Cary courtesy of JDRF]
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
“Scientists heartened at prospect of end to stem cell ban.”
Wow. Extremely disingenuous. When will the MSM learn that it was not a ban on ESCR; it cut off FEDERAL funding for any NEW embryonic stem cell lines. Any private investor can still put all the money he wants into ANY embryonic stem cell lines, and what Bush did only “banned” funding for any new embryonic stem cell lines, not the 60 existing ones or so. Really, really sick how irresponsible the writing of the MSM sometimes is.
“As long as there are excess embryos as a result of IVF – ones that otherwise will be discarded – let’s have something good come of them.”
Ah, proportionalism, the ugly step-child of utilitarianism. Can people even articulate their own worldviews anymore? Do people even know what their worldview is anymore? This kind of thinking leads me to believe the answer is no.
What is Jojo Ruba?
A New Age tea?
I was thinking a type of shampoo, but that’s jojoba.
‘Rent-A-Mob’, coming to an institution of higher learning near you.
The shame to me is that many of the students who came to hear the lecture let the rowdies trample on their right of inquiry. Rather than hold their ground, they left. No reasonable person enjoys the ‘conflict’ that comes from confrontation, but some things are too valuable to be surrendered because resistance is too difficult or too unpleasant.
Though people have the right to free speech, they do not have the right to be heard, but they do have the right to hear.
Pay close attention to who is practicing the censorship.
The ‘Conflict Reslolution Officer’ was more interested in ending the conflict, than he/she was in upholding freedom of academic inquiry.
Freedom loving people cannot allow themselves to be intimidated into surrendering with little or no resistance rights which were won at the price of someone else’s blood and life.
yor bro ken
Another example of pro-choice “Free speech for me but not for thee.”
I am so grateful for a mother who ensured that my reading list included all of Orwell, Huxley, and many others… I am always shocked at the number of people I know my age or younger who have never read these works. Heck, for that matter, I’m always shocked at the number that never read…. Fahrenheit 451 anyone?
I read Fahrenheit 451, a copy from a used book sale (used library books sale). HATED it, since I am a BIG Book Lover / Reader.
Never read Orwell or Huxley, though. I took American Lit and Social Lit in high school: The Bell Jar, A Separate Peace, Black Boy, April Morning, Grapes of Wrath (LOVED IT), The Good Earth (hated it) were the books I read. I also read “To Kill a Mockingbird” and I THINK I read Huck Finn. T.K.A.M was sophomore year of high school.
I don’t think Canada, where that incident took place, even HAS Free Speech rights…..at least not like the US does.
If you haven’t read Orwell or Huxley I highly recommend doing so… 1984 and Brave New World (respectively) as my first pick from each, followed up by Orwell’s Animal Farm.
No time like the present, and these very old books are suddenly very timely.