Jivin J’s Life Links 4-14-11
by JivinJ, host of the blog, JivinJehoshaphat
- I knew the statistic that claimed the District of Columbia spent $62,300 on tax-funded abortions since August was baloney. The evidence comes from Planned Parenthood itself. According to TBD’s Amanda Hess and the DCist, 28 women were scheduled for abortion – in one day at one PP abortion clinic – but they were told last night DC could no longer pay for their abortions.
If you used $450 as a conservative guess for average cost of an abortion that would mean that DC would have spent $12,600 on tax-funded abortions in one day at one clinic. The National Abortion Federation lists 2 additional clinics in DC. A report by Hess claims there were 8 abortion providers in DC in 2008.
- The Philadelphia Dept. of Health has set up a web site where individuals between the ages of 11 and 19 can request free condoms be mailed to them. “Statutory rape? What’s that? Here’s a condom.”
- The University of Delaware paid a woman $50,000 to write on a play where a character playing Jesus “accompan(ies) Alice (the main character) a road trip to Connecticut — with Big Gulps in hand — to evade Delaware’s parental consent laws on abortion.”
- David Klinghoffer has a piece at National Review Online on stem cell research:
An enduring liberal myth, that of the Republican “war on science,” got a subtle rebuke this week when the first and only patient to receive FDA-approved embryonic-stem-cell therapy publicly revealed his identity. Timothy J. Atchison, a 21-year-old nursing student, had been partially paralyzed in a car crash. 6 months ago, scientists at the Shepherd Center in Atlanta sought to test on him the safety of a drug concocted from stem cells of the kind derived by destroying a human embryo.
Are you surprised to learn that this was the very first such clinical test of embryonic-stem-cell research (ESCR)? The news story about Timothy Atchison reminds us that unlike therapies from morally unobjectionable adult stem cells, embryonic stem cells so far have not cured anyone of anything.
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.
How does the fact that clinical testing of embryonic stem cell research has begun offer a “subtle rebuke” to those who point out that Republican elected officials, pandering to people who are very much hostile to science when it doesn’t meet their moral standards, have been one of the major sources of opposition to such research?
The Philadelphia Dept. of Health has set up a web site where individuals between the ages of 11 and 19 can request free condoms be mailed to them.
Philly Dept. of Health:
You’ve got to be joking.
Who decided this was a good idea?
Condoms are dangerous for the environment. Animals, like sea turtles, can swallow them and die.
Eleven years-olds shouldn’t be having sex either.
The University of Delaware paid a woman $50,000 to write on a play where a character playing Jesus “accompan(ies) Alice (the main character) a road trip to Connecticut — with Big Gulps in hand — to evade Delaware’s parental consent laws on abortion
According to the article, the funds were from private donations.
pandering to people who are very much hostile to science when it doesn’t meet their moral standards
I hope you’re not suggesting we abandon ethics in science and scientific research.
pandering to people who are very much hostile to science when it doesn’t meet their moral standards
You’re absolutely right, Joan. Science doesn’t need to adhere to any moral standards. Ethics, schmethics!
On that note, we should no longer condemn scientists of Nazi Germany for experimenting on Jews. They absolutely did not pander to people who were hostile to science when it didn’t meet their moral standards. And the Tuskeegee experiments? Why, those scientists were noble heroes, bravely trying to cure a nasty STD and refusing to pander to people who were hostile to science when it didn’t meet their moral standards!
I’ve seen the light, Joan. Thanks for the insight into how morality is absolutely not necessary when it comes to the advancement of science.
“I hope you’re not suggesting we abandon ethics in science and scientific research.”
No, I didn’t suggest that. Modern science already has a robust, well-developed, and internally enforced body of ethics. Problems arise when external forces–religiously-minded people who don’t appreciate science or bioethics–try to introduce their own special brand of morality into an equation that is already complete. The debate over the morality of embryonic stem cell research is over and done with.
Problems arise when external forces–religiously-minded people who don’t appreciate science or bioethics–try to introduce their own special brand of morality into an equation that is already complete
The trouble with your argument is that the defense of human life is not a religious issue.
See http://www.SecularProLife.org
ESCR is especially redundant given the great successes achieved with adult stem cells. It’s not scientifically necessary to keep on with this line of extremely unethical research.
The debate over the morality of embryonic stem cell research is over and done with.
Then why are we here debating it, joan?
‘Cos you’re a dreamer kellady. You try to debate lots of things which are not going to change.
Ha ha ha, I tried to check out conservapedia and my server tells me its a forbidden site.
A Dept. of Health is giving out condoms to 11 year olds or to anyone of that age and up??? Without going into the moral or legal part, how about the medical part? Do they tell them to WASH THEIR HANDS after touching private parts, male or female? STDs have been found in the eye. See
EYE DISORDERS VENEREAL EYE DISEASE http://www.perret-optic.ch/optometrie/pathologie_oculaire/patho_venerienne/patho_vene1_gb.htm
Even the CDC’s Ready-to-Use STD Curriculum for Clinical Educators Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Module July 2004 Slide 23 Note: “Genital warts found from the public hair to the upper thighs and oral & OCULAR locations.” http://www2.cdc.gov/stdtraining/ready-to-use/Manuals/hpv/hpv-notes.doc
“HPV DNA detected on the bed control panel, light switch, and the colposcope handle were much more likely to indicate contamination from the DOCTOR’S GLOVED HANDS after he/she had examined the patient. Contamination of the examination bed and of the patients’ toilets is more likely to have arisen from the patients themselves, as these are areas with which medical and nursing staff have little or no contact. The toilets sampled were used exclusively by patients, and all HPV types detected were of mucosal origin indicating transfer from genital sites to the environment via hands or by direct contact. HPV DNA was detected at a higher frequency in the male toilets then in the female toilets of GUM clinic A, and only two HPV types were detected in the female toilets compared to five HPV types in the male toilets, again suggesting the transfer of HPV DNA was from the GENITALIA VIA THE HANDS onto the environmental surfaces. Hand carriage of genital HPV DNA has been shown in a previous study, where patients with genital HPV infections were found to carry the same HPV type on their hands.” See Contamination of environmental surfaces by genital human papillomaviruses http://sti.bmj.com/content/78/2/135.full?ijkey=4b7cd9924ab3dccda2d84b73cbd037cb6f6140bd
The debate over the morality of murder is over. Has it gone away? The point of outlawing immoral stuff is to reduce the incidence rate by incarcerating those who do it and deter those who would. Duh.
“No, I didn’t suggest that. Modern science already has a robust, well-developed, and internally enforced body of ethics.”
Guffaw. Yeah, like the scientists at the drug companies and the FDA who – whoops! – didn’t notice that that new drug causes you to bleed to death internally until AFTER they made billions of dollars off of it. Or the scientists who backed Al Gore’s insane fear mongering about catastrophic man-made global warming, when global warming actually isn’t going to result in New York City being underwater and then frozen. Or the scientists who refuse to acknowledge what has been Biology 101 for over a century - that a new human life begins at the point of fertilization.
“Problems arise when external forces–religiously-minded people who don’t appreciate science or bioethics–try to introduce their own special brand of morality into an equation that is already complete.”
I agree, like people who cling to one particular interpretation of a 4,000 year old Hebrew law. Unfortunately our current abortion laws are based on what is an intentional misinterpretation of a law from an ancient theocracy. Why aren’t our abortion laws based on science instead, Joan? Do you advocate for theocracy?