On the far-fetched theory that embryonic stem-cell research destroys tiny little babies, President Bush vetoed legislation today that would have eased federal funding for such research.Bush's reasoning brings to mind a song from the movie "Monty Python's The Meaning of Life," the chorus of which goes like this:
Every sperm is sacred
Every sperm is great
If a sperm is wasted
God gets quite irate
The truth of the matter is that the embryos used in stem-cell research are not derived from eggs fertilized in women's bodies. They are fertilized in vitro, in a clinic, with the informed consent of the donors.
The typical embryo in such research is a four- or five-day-old microscopic cluster of cells called a "blastocyst." A blastocyst consists of about 150 cells. The brain of a fly, in comparison, consists of more than 100,000 cells.
If stem-cell research on blastocysts is immoral, as Bush contends, why doesn't he call for a law against it? Why does he content himself with merely blocking federal funding? Why aren't America's Catholic bishops leading a march on Washington to demand a total ban on embryonic stem-cell research? If every blastocyst is sacred, like every sperm in the Monty Python song, why are the pro-lifers so seemingly apathetic about embryonic stem-cell research that's not funded by the federal government?
3 comments:
The following comment was posted tonight on piece I wrote yesterday about Fred Thompson. I'm assuming that the anonymous commenter meant it to appear here. It reads:
"Rascal - I wonder if any opponents of stem cell research are so pure of thought and character as to swear off any treatment coming from such research? I think it would be a nice debate question. Something like, 'Would you refuse treatment for Alzheimers if you knew the treatment was developed from embryonic stem cell research?' I wonder how a sleazebag like Newt (I know, he hasn't declared yet), would answer the question."
June 20, 2007
The objection stems (excuse the pun) from the fact that the embryo wannabes each have the potential to become a human being.
That's why they were created in the first place.
It's bizarre logic to say 'let's create some embyros in a lab so we can have a child,' and then, months or years later, say "these are just blastocysts that have no significance.
Anonymous: The blastocysts on which stem-cell research is conducted have been, with respect to any other use, discarded. If they're not used for research, they go down the drain or in the trash with medical wastes. Here's a question I ran across today. If you're escaping from a fire and have to choose between a 6-month-old baby and a freezer containing 10,000 blastocysts to take with you from the building, which will it be?
Post a Comment