Monday, March 09, 2009

More Obama Hardness of Hearing

President Obama has signed an executive order allowing federal money to be spent on embryonic stem cell research. The President made a statement that the prior policy made a “false choice between science and moral values.” The President also said that human cloning is dangerous and wrong. While it is true that cloning is immoral, it is odd the President does not understand that killing humans at the embryonic stage of development, a necessity for the research he plans to fund, is also clearly immoral. He is also apparently unaware of the practical connection between embryonic stem cell research and cloning.

The current research on random embryos’ stem cells is not likely to produce any cures for diseases. There are three major problems with directly using the stem cells from just any embryo: The embryonic stem cells have DNA foreign to the patient, mass producing the embryos at levels needed for a therapy to hundreds of people would require thousands of human eggs (which are very difficult to obtain in even small numbers) and, embryonic stem cells consistently produce tumors in the recipients. There is no easy solution to the egg problem, but there will be an attempt to solve the other two problems by taking a patients DNA, cloning dozens of twins of the patient, killing the embryos to harvest their stem cells, and then using the twins’ stem cells for the “therapy.” Why anyone would do something so monstrous when you can already use the patient’s own adult stem cells in therapies that work is unfathomable to me; but that is what will be done at some point in the future if researchers can get enough eggs.

Is it not obvious that the offspring of a human being is a human being? Is it not obvious that from the moment the DNA in a living egg and the DNA in a living sperm connect you obtain a living human being with a distinct identity? Does anybody really believe humans come to life from dead parts just after birth? Does anybody really believe it is moral to kill other human beings and use their body parts for research that might lead to a treatment for a disease - a treatment that can only prolong life, not ultimately prevent death? Obama is famous for saying he would listen to both sides. How can he be listening and still do what he is doing?

According to Rick Peary’s blog, the Obama administration has also asked for a change of the regulation that protects the conscience of medical personnel by protecting their right to refuse to take part in performing abortions. (See http://www.pearceyreport.com/blog/2009/03/obama_cares_not_for_conscience.php).

While Obama’s presidency is for many a sort of symbol of social justice, it is sad that this image is costing uncounted people their lives.

3 comments:

David Aubrey said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
David Aubrey said...

Thanks Dean. I appreciate your blog.

As to the freedom of conscience regulation, we have thirty days to comment on the new regulation (starting yesterday).

The repeal was published in the Federal Register yesterday and will be in the Code of Federal Regulations as 45 CFR Part 88.

To comment email: proposedrescission@hhs.gov

Personally, I think Bush might have been too broad in his regulation by allowing Pharmacists to refuse contraceptives. This would be troubling in rural areas where there are few pharmacies & it probably is not good policy to allow pharmacists to interfere with Physician/Patient relationships.

Still, there needs to be protection for Christian health care workers, particularly with respect to the "morning after pill" & abortion.

I have been encouraging most of my friends & family to comment on this regulation.

Grace.

Dean McConnell said...

Thanks very much David.