Is “science integrity” truly being restored?
Were Bush’s limits on federally funded embryonic stem cell research driven by “political ideology,” rather than science?
Today President Obama will overturn the limits on federally funded embryonic stem cell research and declare that science will guide his administration, instead of political ideology. Obama will ask the National Institutes of Health to implement safeguards that will, in the administration’s view, protect scientific research from politics.
Bush placed limits on stem cell research because he believed that the process killed life. Days-old embryos were destroyed for the stem cells used in research.
Assuming that stem cell research, in fact, kills life, should the U.S. pursue embryonic stem cell research, like many other industrial countries, in search for cures? What kind of moral or ethical implications exist from allowing or disallowing stem cell research?
Also, since a small number of states, including California, and private companies have pursued stem cell research on their own, do you believe that federal funds should be used to pursue stem cell research?
Depending on who is in the Oval Office and their personal beliefs on the matter, the issue of stem cell research – on the federal level – may be re-visited and debated for many years to come.
I just want you all to know that as of yet, there has been no successful use for embryonic stem cells. Adult cells however have been used with great success. I recently did a report on this subject for a term paper and I was disgusted. You can be sure that if the topic has anything to do with death or higher taxes, Obama will be on the wrong side! The current administration is using its usual type of arguement which sidesteps any moral/ethical stance. Science is not made up of all fact, but, morality, like truth is absolute. You must know that the man is completely fine with killing babies in late term abortions, so why would he have a problem with cellular life either.
I think the question presented is a bit of a false dichotomy. Even good science won’t always or perhaps even often dictate policy choices. The stem-cell research question is a good example of that. If you believe that destroying stem cells violates human dignity, it simply will not matter to you whether or not the research holds great promise - the choice to allow the research or not is not one that science can answer.
But that doesn’t mean that there isn’t something to the Obama promise to take science seriously again. Science won’t always dictate policy choices, but to ignore science while making policy choices is to ignore the “reality based community”. The Bush administration’s long time refusal to acknowledge global warning - fortunately remedied before the end of his term - is an example of that. It is one thing to say the best science only takes us so far and now we have to make a policy choice; it is quite another to ignore the best state of scientific knowledge because it doesn’t accord with your preferences.
There is so much inconsistency from Republicans on this issue, they need to come up with a more solid plan.
For example, if Bush believed using embryonic stem cells was tantamount to killing life, that is a most serious crime. He should have pursued legislative routes to make it a crime to use embryonic stem cells. Rather, he passes an executive order banning federal use of funds? That’s not strong enough if you truly believe it kills a life.
The Bush administration was guided by very real ethical concerns. The President believed that allowing research on human embryos would dehumanize man. Whether one agrees with this or not, one should at least acknowledge that the concern is legitimate from within President Bush’s philosophical point of view, and not viciously denigrate anything from that point of view as merely “political ideology.”
Simply ignoring those ethical concerns is not “scientific” in any sense. There is nothing particularly scientific about denying that research may have very real ethical implications. Quite the contrary: people genuinely engaged in the use of science to acquire facts will be the first to acknowledge that there are limits to what science can discover, and that ethics exist outside those limits. The claim that there are no ethics that govern the quest for knowledge is, itself, an ideological point of view that cannot be established by research.
The assertion that imposing that point of view constitutes “a return to science” indicates that the President either does not understand what science is, or intends to use rhetoric to win ideological battles using “science” as a pawn. Either way, what we’re seeing is not a return to science, but rather, the subjugation of science to ideology. As is invariably the case with the morally clueless, President Obama is committing the very sin he claims he’s correcting. God has a sense of irony.
@ steve:
with all due respect, the choice to have a stance on this issue isn’t a choice at all for most people. there is a moral compulsion which requires us to have a stance on this issue, whether the economy is tanking or not. i agree that we, as republicans, often send a very mixed and hypocritical message with our social reforms, but to say that we “should probably stay out of this debate” i think takes the solution too far.
we should be measured in our response. we should use tact and recognize which hills we are going to die on. for better or worse for the party, the sanctity of life simply must be one of those hills for most republicans. if we don’t stand up for it, who will?
As previous commenters have mentioned, there have been many stem cell success stories using adult stem cells. Conversely, embryonic stem cell research has resulted in very few, if any, practical applications or successes. These are indisputable facts that can be easily verified with a brief internet search.
Putting the moral/ethical issues aside, I would submit that pouring billions of taxpayer dollars into embryonic stem cell research is grossly irresponsible. At a time when we can least afford another pork barrel project, embryonic stem cell research is just that!
It concerns me that those who advocate embryonic stem research use the guise of “curing disease” as a basis for their support. Those of us who accept that notion are misguided and uninformed. The same argument is being made for creating human-animal embyros, a process that is now legal in England. There are strict guidelines regarding the ratio of human/animal composition, but there is also very little oversight. Here is a link to a BBC article on human-animal embyros:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7391975.stm
”Planet Of The Apes” may well be our future!
I don’t think it’s ideology or politics as much as it’s just cutting what the federal government spent all around. Should the government be funding EVERY single scientific research project - no matter how beneficial it is? I’m sure enough private money can be raised for such a hot button topic.
I am in accord with X-ray’s comment. Embryonic stem cell research is such a waste of money! It doesn’t work! It’s an excuse for scientists to play around–to play mad scientist…ADULT stem cells are helpful….embryonic stem cell research is just another political tool….i.e., liberal rhetoric-crap!
The benefits are currently zero, highly speculative at best, while the consequences and costs are high–
Don’t get it twisted–Conservatives want the highest degree of liberty with respect to all issues, including health care. We also want the highest degree of efficiency, integrity, and respect for human life. And we also want OUR money spent wisely not wasted. Liberals seem to forget that the government’s money = honest hard working Americans’ money.
Let the Europeans dump their socialist dollars down the drain with this one if it’s so promising! This is the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and Obama need not forget it!
The republicans have allowed the debate to be positioned totally wrong, as with almost every topic. As some have stated, this is a government funding issue, not a ban on any research.
Why have private funds not flowed into embryonic stem cell research? The profit motive is low and not promising.
Why should the taxpayers fund high risk, high reward research which will allow a corporation to make profits on the result of the taxpayer funded research? This is the fundamental question that should be asked on this and many hundreds of other topics.
Where is it constitutional for the federal government to get involved in any of this?
It doesn’t matter what side of the fence you fall on with this issue. The fact is that an issue this volatile (like abortion) should NOT be dealt with at the national level. With respect to ALL of us in this country that are affected by sometimes religious issues like this, it should be voted on locally.
Another excuse to expand the federal government … such a shame.
Let me say this first: I am a Christian before I am a politician.
With that being said, I am heavily conservative in the belief that the killing (KILLING) of a life, regardless of what it attains in the end, is still murder. Yes, could it be the single person that gives up his life for the greater good? It could. But, still doesn’t mean I agree with it, and neither should any that value life over greed.
It comes down to #1) when you view life starts (my view is at conception), #2) if you are selfish and believe that your rights should be put in front of others, so much so that you are willing to KILL for yourself. No, you didn’t hold the gun and commit murder, but those that allow this “research of science” to be funded on MY DIME is now allowing me to feel the brunt of mass murder supported by my “elected” representatives.
There are 21 different types of stem cell research that were allowed under the Bush years, and you know what, those all proved more fruitful than this form of stem cell. As others have commented, adult stem cells actually are more likely to solve all the disease that supporters of embryonic stem cells say that they will cure.
If private citizens want to pay for genocide of unborn babies, then let them feel the moral brunt of their decision. As for me and my tax paying dollars, I want no part of it. Forcing this upon me is an atrocity that will never be heard of from first hand as the cries of those that are being killed are silent. Sound off about this and let your voice speak for them.
May God have mercy upon America for this dastardly mistake done by our “leaders”.
It must be noted that the embryos that they use in the research are embryos that are left over from the fertility fertilization process in fertility clinics. These embryos are frozen and going to be discarded anyway! So, they are using embryos that would otherwise be discarded.
They are not creating new embryos to be used for research. I think this distinction has to be made. If they were creating new embryos solely for the purpose of research, I would oppose that.
But if these embryos are going to be discarded anyway, why not use them for something beneficial rather than just freezing them?
And if you are against stem cell research, do you believe fertility clinics should be shut down? Because fertility clinics kill embryos all the time!
Just because a fertilized egg isn’t implanted doesn’t make it any less of a crime. If an orphan didn’t have a home, would you discard him/her as being unwanted? Trying to legitimize this type of crime is only going to make yourself feel less guilty about killing life. Whether it be a one day old embryo or a teenager or a elderly citizen, it is ALL LIFE.
And yes, if fertility clinics are supported BY MY TAX DOLLARS, killing embryos for their own benefit, then they should be shut down immediately.
When Bush prohibited the use of new embryonic stem cells for research that did not include the private sector. It only said government funds were not to be used for this type of research. Private industry developed two labs, ones that received government funding and those that did not. Those that did not could continue research on new embryonic stem cells.
The change under the Obama directive will simply allow goverment funds to be used for research that was already done with private funds.
Look for this distinction of government and non-government in many issues: universal healthcare will be horrible, but if you can afford to pay out of pocket you will not suffer one bit. Universal public education will be horrible, unless you can send your kid to private school.
Interestingly enough, Obama is creating more class distinctions than any other President in recent memory. Money will be more important now than ever before. It will determine your ability to get the best healthcare and education as two examples.
Well then I think its hypocritical that politicians show outrage against stem cell research and then don’t speak out against fertility clinics that kill embryos all the time. Fertility clinics freeze excess embryos on a daily basis.
So I challenge all Republicans who oppose stem cell research to run on a platform of shutting down fertility clinics.
@KA Killing embryos is not the solution. Even though it is a cliché, it is still true that “two rights do make a right.” The solution is for the couples to demand that the clinic not make only one embryo at a time.
I believe it was more about values, than it was about political ideology. But these days it seems you ask any Democrat and they will tell YOU that your ideology is your values. But no, Bush was sticking to his guns and his values. Make clear, he did not ban stem-cell research. Though I feel in this instance GWB could have attracted and helped his “dogma ideology” image by simply allowing more research into this important area. But at the time, it was not quite a popular decision to fully allow for the funding of such a science where there were some questionable practices going on unregulated. So I think Bush made the right call for his time, but maybe McCain would have done the same thing Obama did. This is not a RIGHT/LEFT issue, it is an important issue for everyone given the opportunities that exist with stem-cells. Lets go experiment!
Russell James Edwards,
Please, please, please do your homework on this! I’m trying to play nice, but your off-the-cuff remarks are making it difficult. These links will help you understand why embyronic stem cell research is not necessary:
http://www.stemcellresearchfacts.com/index.html
http://health.usnews.com/blogs/heart-to-heart/2009/03/04/why-embryonic-stem-cells-are-obsolete.html
http://www.lifeissues.org/cloningstemcell/bradsarticle.html
http://www2.canada.com/calgaryherald/news/theeditorialpage/story.html?id=1ac943a7-4595-4876-8a72-0fe406596085
More evidence that embryonic stem cell research is not necessary:
http://www.bizjournals.com/milwaukee/stories/2009/07/06/daily39.html
When will the lemmings learn?
Leave a comment!
Latest Video
Recent Events
View more photos >
Connect On
Subscribe
© 2009 The New Republicans. All rights reserved. By using this site, you accept our Terms of Use.