Jivin J’s Life Links 3-10-09a
by JivinJ
Obama continued, noting that his stem-cell decision was just the starting point for a larger reevaluation of the role scientists will play in his administration: “It is about letting scientists like those here today do their jobs, free from manipulation or coercion, and listening to what they tell us, even when it’s inconvenient – especially when it’s inconvenient.”…
But critics of human embryo-destructive research have never been hostile to science. The dispute is not about whether stem-cell science should proceed; it is about how it will proceed. Will it go forward in a way that respects all human life? Or will it regard the taking of human life in its early stages as justified by the desire to advance biomedical knowledge and seek therapies? Listening to scientists who tell us what they want to do doesn’t mean we should give them a blank check; we need to determine if what they’re proposing, especially when it’s inconvenient for unborn human life, is what they should be doing…
After seven years and two campaigns of the Democrats attacking the Republicans over President Bush’s stem-cell policy, Obama evidently thought he had to make good on his promise to promote and fund embryo-destructive research, even if it is now scientifically superfluous. And superfluous is exactly what the past year and a half of stem-cell breakthroughs have made it.
BBC News: Obama ends stem cell funding ban
New York Times: Obama lifts Bush’s strict limits on stem cell research (The article later describes Bush’s policy as “a careful compromise.”)
U.S. News and World Report: President Obama reverses Bush’s stem cell research Ban
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.
Jill,
Explain why embryionic stem cell research is now superfluous. We all need the talking points. Thanks for all you do!
How can you talk about vital medical and scientific research as”killing” embryos?
This is ludicrous. Experimenting with a cell or a few of them is not murder !
If these embryos can help science and medicine and improve the lives a vast numbers of people, and we can find ways to deal with genetic diseases, injuries etc, how can you call this murder?
It’s unbelievable the way you anti-choicers have been deluded by religious obscurantism. Not only that, this research could prevent unwanted pregnancies and reduce abortions greatly too !
when they remove the stem cells from the HUMAN EMBRYO, the EMBRYO DIES.
Science has shown us that Human Embryos are human beings at their earliest stage of life. ESCR destroys a tiny human being.
Adult stem cells is where the treatments and cures are happening. ESCR has only had tumors happening.
“Perpetuating a needless stem-cell war”
He’s not perpetuating it; he’s ending it. Most Americans support embryonic stem cell research. There’s nothing wrong with using embryos that would have been discarded anyway to save lives.
“How can you talk about vital medical and scientific research as”killing” embryos?”
Robert, 2-3 years ago, Dartmouth held a Stem Cell Summit and one of the speakers they brought in was Dr. John Gearhart of John Hopkins University, the first scientist to isolate embryonic stem cells back in 1998 (along with Dr. James Thomson of U Madison). So he is the father of ESCR. I have the notebook in which I took notes from his talk at school, but I do remember writing down a quote somewhat along the lines of “the stem cell is removed and the embryo is killed.” I can fax this to you. The embryo is always killed when one harvests its stem cells. You will not find a single scientist who will say that an embryo is not killed when you harvest its stem cells.
“It’s unbelievable the way you anti-choicers have been deluded by religious obscurantism.”
Nice straw man, never seen that one before, but if you can find me some science text that says that says that an adult was never an embryo, I’ll concede. Otherwise, you are either anti-science because you don’t believe the embryo is human or you’re a bigot because you discriminate against humans in their beginning stages of existence.
“Not only that, this research could prevent unwanted pregnancies and reduce abortions greatly too ! ”
I’d love to a hear a syllogism connecting these dots, but for the umpteenth time, we are not utilitarians. Why would you use a utilitarian argument to try and persuade us?
There’s that word “choice” again. “Pro-choice” does not mean supporting of choice. Only supporting the choices that “pro-choice” people would choose.
Notice these nuts lump all “stem cell research” together when they say anything about restrictions. And the polls that they use to claim the majority of Americans support ESCR, aren’t that at all. The majority of American support science. Adult stem cell research is what most Americans support. Not ESCR.
But the left is never satisfied. They will edit the language used as well. No more mention of abortion. Just stem cell harvesting.
I don’t go to church. I’m not blinded by religion. But even I can see the dangers of forcing tax payers to fund research that the private sector won’t touch and that most thinking people see is at least unnecessary, and at worst morally reprehensible. But then again, the left believes the only immoral thing is believing anything they support is immoral.
“Obama continued, noting that his stem-cell decision was just the starting point for a larger reevaluation of the role scientists will play in his administration: “It is about letting scientists like those here today do their jobs, free from manipulation or coercion, and listening to what they tell us, even when it’s inconvenient – especially when it’s inconvenient.”
This is Obamanese for, “There is no God”.
I love how no pro-choicer EVER responds to your posts Bobby. Theyre scared of the facts. Keep on trucking brother. Dont let up.
Bobby… and even if we WERE utilitarians, the utilitarian viewpoint would support using ASCs, as they are the ones proving to work without causing the tumor proliferation seen with embryonic lines!
There is no level… ethical, moral, or even purely pragmatic that justifies using ESCs.
Elisabeth :”…pragmatic that justifies using ESCs.”
I disagree. Its about making money. If Obama supports the fruitless research, there will be a lot of scientists who can garner private and public funds to secure a job. Its also about earning votes. You have to remember that Obama is a brand. His campaign called him this. Everyone has a relative with these diseases that could magically be cured by the research. Obama sells the message that the Democrats really care, they do. Its all a ploy of course.
the same Democrats that started the KKK?
A caller on OPEN LINE on EWTN Radio mentioned this today. Its called following the $. It really IS all about the almighty $. They were talking about how Juvenile Diabetes was cured in Mice with Adult Stem Cells, but the Juvenile Diabetes Association refuses to help fund human trials for Adult Stem Cells.
Posted by: Robert Berger at March 10, 2009 9:04 AM
“How can you talk about vital medical and scientific research as”killing” embryos?
This is ludicrous. Experimenting with a cell or a few of them is not murder !”
——————————————————
Mr. Berger,
I challenge you once again to practice the gospel you preach.
Donate your living body to science for medical research.
You can do it all at once or organ by organ, cell by cell.
I suggest you start with your brain. Some body could probably put it to better use. If you auction it off it will fetch top price. It has rarely been used.
Show us what you are made of.
yor bro ken
Mr. Berger,
If you your body does not measure up to the high standards that researchers demand, you ask your mother or father or son or daughter to be your proxy.
“Some of you may die in this quest, but that is a sacrifice Mr. Berger is willing to make in the name of science and humaniyt.”
Wait, what was I thinking, we have all these inmates on death row and all these old folks in nursing homes. They are all going to die anyway, some sooner than later. Maybe one them will volunteer to die your place.
Why you could even reward their surviving family members the way the the families of misguied muslims strapped to a bomb are compensatee by other wealthy, but not so foolish muslims.
Mr. Berger you start your own reality show and call Dying for Dollars. You award bonus bucks for creativity and style.
yor bro ken
reality, when respondents are apprised of more facts, i.e. given a more thorough poll rather than sixteen words and a question mark, they vacillate between support and opposition:
http://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/public-opinion-and-the-embryo-debates
Note that, when offered this sentence, “An embryo is a developing human life, therefore it should not be destroyed for scientific or research purposes,” 62% agreed.
My note to the White House just now:
Whatever the perceived problems with the Presidential statement of August 9, 2001, revoking Executive Order 13435 cannot be construed as respect for science. Order 13435 actively promoted ambitious science which has proven tremendously fruitful.
I can’t even advise “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it,” because you’ve apparently already decided that “since it’s humming along splendidly, let’s break the damn thing.”
13435 promoted the most general possible research — yes, with one substantial but very specific restraint. You’ve now flipped this on its head — supporting a narrow band of ethically controversial research while pulling the rug out from under broader, uncontroversial IPS cell research which has yielded fantastic results.
This smacks of subordinating science to politics — remarkably, the posture your administration claims to have identified in the previous administration’s policies.
What were you thinking?
Spot on rasqual.
You have connected the dots exquisitely.
Excellent. Sweet. Righteous.
yor bro ken
Rasqual shoots, he scores!
This latest fiasco is typical of the political left. They get attached to an idea. They believe it is brilliant and correct and no one should oppose them. Those that do oppose them must be either uneducated or religious zealots.
Of course to remain attached to the idea that cures can only come from ESC one must ignore all of the science and cures that have come from ASC and likewise ignore the appalling results of all ESC to date.
And these folks call the rest of us “blinded by ideology.” Hello Pot, Meet Kettle.
Ah, but Oliver, that is greed, not pragmatism.
I foresee a day when couples get a tax credit for donating their embryos to science, you know, like a sweater you’ll never wear anyway. It’ll be charity! Patriotic, even! The vast majority of people are ignorant of the difference between adult stem cell research (which has yielded results) and embryonic stem cell research (which has not). Just imagine the advances the Nazis could have made with THEIR scientific research on those destined for the incinerator anyway. Pesky Allied forces got in the way, imposing their morality on others.
Ken@5:16:
You forget–someone has already died in Mr. Berger’s place. He took the punishment for every wrong thing that Mr. Berger has done, donating his body and every drop of his blood so that Mr. Berger could be cleansed of his sins.
Mr. Berger, all you have to do is accept this gift, freely given, of the body of Jesus Christ, broken for you, and his blood, poured out for you. It cures the blackest of all diseases–the stain of sin, a congenital affliction common to all mankind.
It is open to asitis, to reality, to Josephine, and everyone who comments here, and many here have already availed themselves of it. It is why I will do my utmost never to kill another in the same image of the One who has carried away my infirmities.