Ediblog.com
Guest Commentary 4
Not Cures
News
        earlier this week that researchers at Wake Forest University and Harvard
        Medical School have uncovered a new non-controversial stem cell
        treatment did nothing to stem the tide of pro-embryonic stem cell
        madness that swept Congress on Thursday.
In
        a vote that still fell well short of the two-thirds majority required to
        overcome a presidential veto, the U.S. House passed H.R. 3 by a 253 to
        174 margin on Jan. 11. The bill would lift restrictions established by
        President Bush in 2001 that prevent federal dollars from being used for
        additional research involving the destruction of human embryos.
Completely
        side-stepping the morality of annihilating human life in the name of
        curing disease, Congresswoman Diana Degette (D–CO), the bill’s
        primary sponsor, expressed elation in a prepared statement after the
        legislation passed.
“This
        is a victory for ethical science as well as true bipartisanship,” she
        said. “Most importantly, it is a victory for the 100 million Americans
        and their families who suffer from diseases like Parkinson’s,
        Alzheimer’s and diabetes.”
Such
        rhetoric is nothing new from Washington politicians. The troubling
        reality is that even scientists currently experimenting with embryonic
        stem cells admit that cures are years and perhaps decades away from
        coming to fruition. Yet that hasn’t halted the rhetorical firestorm
        from Washington.
As
        is so often the case, John Edwards eloquently displayed this in 2004 by
        suggesting that a vote for John Kerry was a vote for helping Christopher
        Reeve out of his wheelchair.
What’s
        the next promise – embryonic stem cells will cause humans to walk on
        water and raise the dead?
For
        all their talk about cures, though, the nagging question is why
        Democrats and liberal-minded Republicans in Congress habitually extol
        the miraculous benefits of embryonic stem cells while downplaying the
        myriad ethical alternatives. The rhetoric is even more hypocritically in
        light of the fact that non-embryonic stem cell research is already
        revealing the kinds of treatments Edwards is looking for, but without
        the dubious ethical implications.
Yet
        another example arose earlier this week at Wake Forest’s Institute for
        Regenerative Medicine (IRM) in Winston-Salem, N.C. Dr. Anthony Atala and
        his research team were able to extract stem cells from the amniotic
        fluid that surrounds the developing fetus in pregnant women.
The
        amniotic-fluid derived stem cells are believed to closely resemble those
        found in human embryos. In fact, the stem cells have already been used
        to create “muscle, bone, fat, blood vessel, nerve and liver cells in
        the laboratory,” according to an IRM press release.
So,
        with the IRM research, not to mention the other treatments developed
        from adult stem cells, why does Congress have an apparent obsession with
        destructive embryonic stem cell research?
I
        can tell you in one word: abortion.
Those
        who subscribe to the pro-abortion ideology have very little wiggle-room
        when it comes to the value of an embryo. After all, what makes medical
        experimentation on human embryos immoral if life begins at some
        unspecified date after conception or birth? In that case, embryos are
        merely “products of conception” wholly lacking any human worth,
        right?
This
        is the chief reason embryonic stem cell research is being pushed so
        feverishly, even in the face of non-controversial alternatives. To admit
        even the slightest possibility that an embryo might have human worth
        would be to violate the sacrosanct pro-abortion philosophy. Why else
        would abortion advocacy organizations like Planned Parenthood and NARAL
        Pro-Choice America so strongly support embryonic stem cell research?
        Stem cells seemingly have nothing to do with abortion, birth control, or
        “sexual liberation,” so why the big fuss?
The
        answer is simple: for all their rhetoric about choice, abortion
        advocates have only one option on the stem cell issue. Anything less
        than no-holds-barred embryo research would violate their ideology –
        they can’t afford not to support it.
It’s
        a sad cultural commentary when any nation sanctions abuse and
        manipulation of the weak in order to improve the livelihood of the
        strong, especially in the name of political philosophy. Throughout
        history, evil is almost always tied to a socially desirable idea that
        gives it a tolerable face, and embryonic stem cell research is no
        different.
The
        question for the American people is whether we will settle for evil
        cloaked around a “good idea” or uphold one of the highest ideals
        known to man – the sacredness of every human life.
David N. Bass is a freelance writer.