|
Soapbox Philosophy: A big win for adult stem cell research
by Gregory R. Norfleet · Op-Ed · November 28, 2007
As one of the many who oppose embryonic stem cell research on moral and ethical grounds, I was thrilled to hear the news last week that scientists had successfully turned skin cells into stem cells.
Yes, there are still some hurdles to overcome, but the breakthrough is phenomenal in that embryos do not have to be destroyed in the process.
The new process was surprisingly easy, said one scientist. That should be yet another reason to sideline embryonic stem cell research as a moral and scientific loser.
I was disappointed that U.S. Senator Tom Harkin issued a statement that said the scientists “have performed truly groundbreaking and historic accomplishments” yet “this new development does not mean that we should discontinue studying embryonic stem cells ... (because) scientists may yet find that embryonic stem cells are more powerful.”
The argument that embryonic stem cell research is promising in curing certain currently incurable diseases, like diabetes, Alzheimer’s and spinal-cord injury-induced paralysis is certainly encouraging. I would not argue that we should give it up simply because it has yet to result in any actual cures or treatments, but destroying an embryo is destroying a human being. We think it is not the same because we can’t see its fingers, toes, or, most importantly, its face. If advocates had to look them in the eye before calling for death, I believe many would lose their resolve. We are killing a human being in hopes of enjoying a higher quality of life or, at least, a longer life. The trade-off is far out of balance.
I do not want to see death take anybody — I wish the people I love could live forever. No doubt you do, too. But it is unfair to take someone’s entire life away from them just so we can have a little extra life to ourselves.
Republican presidential hopeful Fred Thompson also issued a statement, pointing out that there are now 73 breakthroughs for adult and cord blood research to date, while there are none for embryonic stem cell research.
“For all who are concerned for patients and their families, the effective, ethical and compassionate answer is to put our money where the breakthroughs are happening — in adult stem cell research.”
The embryonic stem cell research arguments are so compelling, so alluring that people will lie and deceive to try to get there. In Illinois, Gov. Rod Blagojevich championed $10 million in additional funding so that the Illinois Department of Public Health could conduct more “medical research.” Who could argue with that? Then, after the budget passed, he signed an executive order that the whole $10 million go toward embryonic stem cell research. Why? Because he couldn’t get the legislature — despite being run by his own party, the Democrats — to agree to such a controversial idea. So he tricked them.
But adult stem cells do not require that a person die. Anyone can donate adult stem cells without changing the course of their life. Yes, it’s easy for me to say this since I do not know anyone who could be saved by embryonic stem cell technology should it ever bear fruit. But I would rather make the right decision when it is easier to do so.
We need to take morals into account because science doesn’t tell us what we should do, it only tells us what we can do.
We like it in the movies when someone sacrifices themselves to save others, but we have to let them make the decision. An individual’s free will is also tantamount. If society or government or business or whatever strips someone of their ability to choose, then we have done yet another evil.
It also creates a slippery slope, a toehold into more sophistry — if we can take life from this person, then why not someone else in similar, but not exact, circumstances?
We should focus our energies and dollars on researching adult stem cells and stop pursuing embryonic stem-cell research.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
