So after several other pro-abortion decisions in his fledgling administration, today Obama decides to allow funding for research with new lines of embryonic stem cells. It is being reported by the likes of the Washington Post that BO feels he is "depoliticizing" science. (You see, when you take the liberal political position, you aren't being political, you're being purely rational/prescient/practical/what-have-you, in this case, scientific.) What it seems he actually is doing is "de-ethicizing" science since the policy revealed today seems to have no ethical restraints of any kind.
BO is simply pursuing every avenue to help those afflicted with diseases who could benefit from stem cell research. Never mind that there has been much less promise in the area of embryonic research -- and in fact a new study has found that such therapy has been causing tumors. No matter -- we have to cover every base.
I actually heard a medical ethicist describe it as going to Vegas and putting money down on every number at the roulette table. You're bound to come up a winner with that strategy. What?!
That is not how medical research works -- as any medical ethicist should know. Otherwise, why aren't we giving money to homeopathic research for the treatment of Parkinson's? Herbal treatments? How about aroma therapy?
In research, you are not guaranteed a win, and placing money on every possibility -- especially when you have a finite amount of funds to work with -- is not only impractical, but takes money away from the more promising studies. Focusing funds to the studies that have actually produced favorable results will more than likely lead to treatments and maybe even cures sooner.
This same guy said that embryos are just going to be thrown out anyway, so why not put them to good use? Put to good use? You mean let them make more money for the fertility clinic? Because they're not just going to give them away. (Despite whatever guidelines BO says he wants, money will change hands.) Here's a good use: Let the embryos be adopted by other couples (heck I've even heard there are nuns who would volunteer to give the embryos a chance) -- but no, the couples who create the embryos don't want to give them up. They want them destroyed. Better to assuage their guilt by making them think it's ok because it will help important research (not). But I digress...
For years, we have heard heart-breaking pleas that cutting off funds to embryonic research was taking away hope for a treatment or cure. Not entirely accurate since there has been private funding, and there was still public funding for established cell lines. (A fair compromise that all the MSM seems to be forgetting.) And now that there has been no major progress in embryonic research (and even a down-side, with the tumor discovery) while there have been many exciting breakthroughs in non-embryonic stem cells, it seems cruel in my mind to keep using those poor souls to promote the abortion agenda.
So you know those poor moms of kids with diabetes and the husbands of women with Alzheimer's who have been convinced they were being denied the chance for a cure? How are they going to feel when they lose that person just a short time before the treatment or cure is discovered using one of the non-embryonic methods?
"Sorry, with more money, that alternative research would have found the treatment or cure in time for your loved one -- but we had to funnel funds to the dead-end embryonic research for ideological reasons. You understand, don't you?"
They won't, but it will be too late. And the politicians, radical pro-abortion feminists, and the abortion industry will be laughing their way to the bank.
Comments