The Culture of Life, Vindicated
Give Thanks for this at least
By Ben Domenech Posted in Abortion | Life Issues | Stem Cell Research — Comments (10) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
It may have met with silence from the left and joy from the right, but the announcement of a major advancement in the field of stem cell research is something worth being thankful for this year.
There was a debate, prior to the nominations of Roberts and Alito, concerning the pro-life accomplishments of President Bush or lack thereof. Many pro-lifers, including myself, feel that we've missed opportunities over the past few years to accomplish great leaps forward. We sense the tide turning in the populace as poll after poll details a shift in the American view of abortion - now reaching a point where 6 out of every 10 Americans hold the view that abortion should only be allowed in cases of rape, incest, or to save the life of the mother. We understand he has had other priorities - but we wish President Bush would have fulfilled his promise in 2000, and invested more effort in using the bully pulpit to apply this shift against our extreme abortion laws.
But as it stands, we have to acknowledge one truth about President Bush: taken as a whole, his presidency has marked more achievements for the culture of life than any that came before it.
Read on.
Consider: his Justice Department has selected exceptional and well-qualified nominees, including two for the highest court in the land; his administration has, on the vast majority of decisions, stayed loyal to the cause of life; and on the issue of federal funding for stem cell research - where the popular path pushed against small government and against life - he ignored the polls and took a strong stand. The medical research industry loves to get taxpayer funding for edgy research that may or may not result in moneymaking treatments at the end of the day, and they even lured Bill Frist to their side. Let us repeat: embryonic stem cell research is not banned in America. It is legal, and always has been. The issue at hand was taxpayer funding of said research – and just as the GOP does not believe in taxpayer funding for the destruction of unborn people, we should not embrace taxpayer funding for the destruction of embryonic people.
Now the news is even more promising, more than the victories against federal funding, even more than the long list of positive news on adult stem cell usage. Without the need to destroy embryonic life, medical advancements that can save lives will be achieved without ending them.
Let's be thankful for this, for news that is happier than we could ever have hoped: because President Bush took an unpopular stand, and stuck by it as the mass media made it become more unpopular, the truth about the science of stem cells has won the day. The culture of death is left to find another issue, another stalking horse, to replace it. But on this issue, there is no longer any question: they lost.
« Redstate Roundtable: Obama's Unending Psychology of Change — Comments (12) | It's not about the Human Life Amendment — Comments (13) »
The Culture of Life, Vindicated 10 Comments (0 topical, 10 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
And will be just as disingenuous as before - but the link between politics and reasonable discourse is pretty weak.
These new studies are good news but they don't end the scientific need to contiue research on embryonic stem cells and don't end the need for rational discussion on ethical considerations inteh science - rather than political posturing by either side who has agendas that are completely unrelated to science, medicine or the progress of mankind.
The reason why those ads are effective at all is because the public doesn't understand the true issues involved in the science (not suprising since they aren't scientists) and both pro-life and pro-choice political groups 'embelish' scientific discoveries to bolster their positions. The way to disarm these ads is to be upfront enoug with the public that you are credible - which menas acknowledging the potential scientific value of research that includes destructions of embryos while raising the legitimate ethical concerns that such research creates. Denying the former, as often done by pro-life groups, or denying the latter as often done by pro-choice groups only serves to discredit both sides in the eyes of the public and they dig in to their preconcieved opinions and we go nowhere.
This breakthrough is very early in the process. The cells created form tumors consisting of a haphazard collection of different types of cells when injected and thus cannot be used for therapies now or in the near future.
Opposition to embryonic stem cell research will still be a net political negative until someone figures out how to "switch on" the naturally occurring genes responsible for returning these cells to pluripotency rather than inserting contructs in a more or less random fashion. We are still quite a ways from this.
This process is analogous to hotwiring your car rather than using the key, if each time you hotwired your car there was a large chance that you would fry the entire electrical system.
For vetoing both embryonic stem cell research bills. That was a courageous stand.
He deserves far less credit for his selections to the highest court in the land. Left to his druthers, he would have selected Miers and Gonzalez. The exceptional choices there are due to a base that wouldn't back down when the President wanted to ignore them. He was tardy and slow on nominating qualified judges when he had a Republican congress behind him, and that is regrettable. And he was far too passive in the face of Democratic obstructionism of his nominees.
There was a crucial moment in the Culture of Life/Culture of Death debate in his administration, and that was the forced starvation and dehydration of Terri Schiavo. The President was silent and passive. He does not deserve credit for his conduct in that episode.
He has not used the bully pulpit on this or any other issue, for that matter, except perhaps amnesty for illegal aliens. I'm not sure where his other priorities were when it came to using the bully pulpit.
His record on Culture of Life issues is mixed, in my opinion. I think his presidency has been a missed opportunity on this issue. He didn't do the wrong thing, under extreme pressure, and that is admirable. But he didn't really push hard on doing the right things, and that is regrettable.
And would he have signed the PBA bill? Just a few simple questions for the folks that seem to believe that the only way a president can affect life issues is through judicial appointments...
One nation, in the courtrooms, with litigiousness and judicial activism for all.
Is anyone pushing any legislation to outlaw in vitro fertilization? I don't think any candidate would stand up on that.
Wait, we're supposed to be for outlawing in vitro fertilization now?
This Culture of Life thing is getting complicated.
over at the moral slums of the left. A golden opportunity to destroy life is lost, the chance to preen and posture and whine about saving lives against the machinations of the cold hearted Right also gone. But industrious ghouls that they are they at this moment will repair to the banner of defeat and disgrace in Iraq in order to save their day. There must be other things degenerate and destructive to raise their flagging spirits and they will find them.
"a man's admiration for absolute government is proportinate to the contempt he feels for those around him". Tocqueville
leftist 527s can no longer run ads like this one that suggest conservatives don't care about sick people:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EBobHMq-ixI