Snowflakes vs. Nazis
More on ESCR and the Frist betrayal:
Michael Fumento writes about the scientific promise of ESCR: "If the technology has a fraction of the true potential its backers claim, the market will fund it." Apparently, it doesn't.
The thinking of the Nazi crowd (look back at the bio-ethical practices of Nazi Germany - and, of course, the entire philosophy that Hitler espoused) seems to be as follows: If we can convince the American people of the amazing medical potential of embryonic stem cell research (regardless of whether there is much potential), Americans will be willing to do anything to get there (even the systematic harvesting of a small, unwanted portion of the population for their body parts).
Frist and other little Eichmanns (e.g., the Democratic Party, Ron Reagan, Michael J. Fox, Senators Hatch, Lott, Coleman, etc.) may be utilitarians, but I hope Americans will understand that actions can be intrinsically right or wrong. The ends don't always justify the means.
Of course, considering the evidence, perhaps they're not utilitarians. Indeed, the destruction of human embryos in-and-of-itself seems to have become an object of liberal worship.
On the same topic, today's emotional Focus on the Family broadcast recounts an event at the White House last spring with many families that had adopted frozen embryos. The adopting was done through the Snowflakes Embryo Adoption Program. The president's speech that day can be found here.
Practically speaking, can every frozen embryo find a loving family to grow up in? Yes, and we need to make it happen.
See Steve Wagner's info sheet on ESCR. And for a great piece on the whole issue, read Greg Koukl's article "The Confusing Moral Logic of Embryonic Stem Cell Research."
Koukl adds this about "extra" embryos: "What should we do with the extra embryos? Following our moral principles, since embryos are each valuable human beings, we should treat them like anyone else..." Read the rest.
Also, earlier ESCR posts can be found here, here, and here.
Update: Do No Harm is an excellent website on the whole stem cell issue. Also, here's a list of talking points from Carrie Gordon Earll, and Scott Klusendorf has this piece. And the brilliant Robert P. George has this on the issue.
Plus, while we know the promise of ESCR is way overhyped, it surely has more healing potential than adult stem cell research, right? (though it hasn't led to any treatments yet, while adult stem cells have led to dozens). Perhaps not.
A quick primer: Incidentally, the majority of the public seems to be fairly ignorant about this issue. I don't know if I've emphasized enough that there are two types of stem cell research: adult and embryonic. ASCR is perfectly ethical and funded heavily by the federal government. It has led to numerous medical benefits and saved lives. ESCR, said to have greater potential but which necessitates the destruction of human embryos to harvest their cells, has yet to lead to any benefits at all. It is perfectly legal in the private sphere, and the current government policy funds research on stem cells derived from embryos already destroyed prior to the implementation of the policy. But it does not use taxpayer money to destroy new embryos for research. Frist and company want to do just that.