I guess the living don’t qualify for “Culture of Life” protection in some circles:
Senator Specter apparently wants a place on your wall. Here’s why he shouldn’t get the chance.
Pick your poster child: Arlen Specter, bald from chemotherapy treatments for Hodgkin’s disease, saying that he is Exhibit A for embryonic stem-cell research … or those cute little kids in the AP photo with this caption: “President Bush appeared at the White House with babies and toddlers born of test-tube embryos, some wearing shirts that read ‘former embryo.'”
“I look in the mirror every day,” says Specter, “barely recognize myself. And not to have the availability of the best of medical care is simply atrocious.”
Meanwhile, President Bush was busy praising a Christian agency that helps couples adopt frozen embryos. Amidst 21 babies and toddlers who began their lives as frozen embryos left over after fertility treatments, the president said, “there is no such thing as a spare embryo.”
So, again, pick your poster child. The man with a disease who thinks there is vast medical potential in destroying babies described as embryos, or the children who developed from their embryonic state to roll around on White House carpet.
Contemptible bastard. I hope there is a hell, at least in his case.
(Via Crooks and Liars via Joe Gandleman)
ppgaz
Great line.
My dog did play the piano, though.
Just not very well.
Adam
Who are these idiots? Why should we care what they think? Sure it’s stupid and extreme, but you can find people who say stupid and extreme things on any side of any issue, and using them to bash the whole “culture of life”, as much as I share your misgivings about them, is a little unfair to the rest of the movement.
Unless I’m wrong and these are actually people that matter in the movement, or their sentiments are widely shared, in which case I will gladly shut up.
stephen
I don’t want to be mean here or anything, Adam, but you may indeed want to gladly shut up. Sure, Matt Friedeman, PhD is an anonymous idiot with saying stupid and extreme things, but then he wasn’t the one in the photo-op with the embryo kids, was he? That was Mr. Bush, and he or his handlers quite obviously know exactly what they’re doing, and to who they are pandering. I’ll also not that the AFA website boasts that they are 2,219,436 members strong (and growing!) – not an insignificant number if it is to be believed. So, yeah, I think you’re wrong and that these people actually matter a lot in your movement.
(I confess to not knowing exactly which movement you think you are a part of, though I suspect the movement in question is not what you think it is, at least not anymore.)
The DV
This is the American Family Association, the people who literally scream “Think of the children.” There is no value or logic in their opinions.
Stormy70
We need an actual debate on this issue, instead of heated words (like that will ever happen). I am uneasy with embryonic stem cell research, and I need more information on this issue before I would support it. I don’t need kneejerk condemnations on both sides, I need evidence that this is the correct way to go. Are umbilical cord stem cells better? I don’t know. Cloning embryonic cells seems very science fiction, and who knows what problems will arise with cloned embryos? I think alot more research into cloned animal cells should be required before the jump to cloning human cells.
What is wrong with private funding for this, why must it be funded by the federal government?
Halffasthero
I agree with Stormy70. The language is getting nasty and any hope for a reasonable discussion is getting thrown out the window. The Asians are going to run over us in medical research if we start getting tied up in the politics of this.
As for the private vs. Federal funding, likely the states with the medical research facilities will provide their own for competitive reasons. The Governator from CA was tipped on this.
Mr Furious
From what I’ve read, cord (umbilical) stem cells are blood-based and only good for a limited number of potential research directions and ultimate uses. they are useful, and hold great potential, but only in the areas and diseases related to blood.
Embryonic stem cells (if the scientific community is to be believed–and I believe them over the religious community) offer a wider array of research possibilities because they contain the whole spectrum of genetic (?) information/building blocks.
Bear in mind, I don’t know what the hell I’m talking about. But, clearly, not all stem cells are equal or interchangeable–keep it in mind when weighing the rhetoric.
Anon
Ron Baily had a darn good article at Reason on this topic.
First the issue is misrepresented – it’s blastocytes that are being used for stem cell research – before any cell differentiation happens.
With the advent of medical science, it has become possible to trigger any cell from your body to develop into a blastocyte mass. This shifts the argument from whether a single fertilized egg is a potential life to every cell in your body is a potential life.
Follow the argument to it’s logical conclusion where science will eventually provide us with the ability to enter a genomic sequence and produce a cell from protein raw materials and you have to wonder where this whole thing will lead? Think of the culture of life for proteins!
Adam
That’s hardly fair, Stephen, especially considering that I think we should be doing all the Stem Cell research we can. Our medical edge is extremely important and needs to be maintained at all costs, if you ask me. But that doesn’t mean I can’t object to the smear tactic of dragging out some random fool who says horrible things and using him to smear the whole pro-life movement, however much I disagree with them.
Mr Furious
As far as funding goes, this is an issue in Michigan, as the U-M os a leading research university. The governor would like to fund this stuff, but has a Republican legislature to deal with, and, unlike the Federal government, she has to balance the budget.
I’m sure it’s the same in California…where the hell will that money come from?
neil
I think it’s contemptible that there are people who are out there ‘adopting’ spare embryos, when there are thousands of living, breathing, hungry orphans who need families. And these people have the arrogance to claim that they’re the ones who truly respect human life…
The babies with whom the President appeared last week are from Nightlight Christian Adoption’s “Snowflakes Embryo Adoption Program.” Why is it called “Snowflakes?” Well, ask yourself, what’s the difference between these babies and African or Asian orphans?
bg
I’m with Neil. There are plenty of babies up for adoption. Just not a lot of white ones. I know a white couple who adopted who adopted a Russian girl. When they voice their displeasure (which they only did once), they said they didn’t realize their baby would be Siberian. I asked why not, because Siberia is part of Russia, right? They couldn’t bring themselves to admit out loud they wanted a white baby. I think that’s normal though – to want a baby that resembles you.
According to my readings, Mr. Furious is correct – umbilical cord cells have been very useful in curing blood diseases, but they are limited to blood diseases.
Mr Furious
You don’t even have to go to Africa, Guatemala or Asia for orphans that need homes. There are half a million kids in this country in the foster care system that need homes.
But adopting a six year old kid of any race might upset the delicate sensibilites of people who need to start out with a baby, especially one that resembles them.
If these stem-cell opposing maniac jackasses have their way, they’ll have all those embryoes brought to term and double the foster-care rolls. Who cares once they’re out of the womb, right?
Jay C
“Contemptible bastard. I hope there is a hell, at least in his case.”
Sorry, John, but I can’t seem to parse your comment correctly. Does this phrase refer to Senator Specter, President Bush, “Matt Friedman, PhD”, or Donald Wildmon?
Since I would pretty much agree with your estimation in all the above, I would appreciate knowing which particular c.b. you were referring to.
Anon
If these stem-cell opposing maniac jackasses have their way, they’ll have all those embryoes brought to term and double the foster-care rolls. Who cares once they’re out of the womb, right?
It’s just our tax dollars keeping the government foster care kid industry going. After all it takes a village to raise a child – oops wait, that was Hillary who said that. I’m finding it harder and harder to differentiate between the left and right these days.
I’m sure once we’re taxed to keep everyone else’s blastocytes in a frozen state indefinitely, it won’t be too much of a problem.
John Cole
Jay C.- The author.
Halffasthero
John, I hope your last post meant:
“To: Jay C
Re: A place in hell
I was referring to the author. ”
as opposed to hoping there was a place in hell for Jay C.
Jon H
“There are plenty of babies up for adoption. Just not a lot of white ones.”
And as a bonus, people who go to fertility clinics are more likely to be affluent, so you’re not just getting white kids when you buy their embryos, you’re getting white kids with a good pedigree.
synuclein
Not to put too fine a point on it, but the essential difference between embryonic stem (ES) cells and umbilical “stem cells” or adult “stem cells” is the simple fact that the umbilical and adult “stem cells” are, more correctly progenitor cells.
With the ES cells — these have never “differentiated” and exist as a mass of essentially identical cells with no “imprinting”. As such, they are (theoretically) capable of becoming any cell in an organism, and are referred to as totipotent.
Progenitor cells, by contrast, are derived or isolated from “incompletely” differentiated cell types. By this, I mean that the progenitor cells are, by their nature, part way down a path of differentiation (brain, bone marrow, etc.). The body “holds” them at this point as a “reserve pool” to provide damage repair machinery. Because they are not terminally differentiated, they are capable of becoming a number (but not all–in all probability) of different cell types (including — relatively recently — back to something resembling (but not) an ES cell). As such they are referred to as pluripotent.
As cells begin to differentiate, certain genes get turned on or off, depending on cell needs. Some of these switches can be reset (usually with the side-effect of cancer), but others don’t seem to be able to re-set. This is one reason why ES cells are preferrable to progenitor cells. Another reason is that the ES cells are from a very young source, and each cell seems to have an “internal cycle counter” — eventually resulting in the death of the cell. This system seems to not be engaged in ES cells. This means that the progenitor cells have a more limited “lifespan” than the ES cells.
As far as the suggestion to work with animal ES cells — this is a good one. Just remember that a man is not a mouse (in more ways than just the obvious), and the data from animal ES cells may prove to be less than useful in understanding how to work with human ES cells.
Finally, regarding the funding — it is true that CA and NJ (and some other states are pending) have established state funding. However, the lion’s share of research funding (especially in biomedical sciences) comes from the government (via NIH, NSF, and DoD). Most private foundations cannot hope to compete with NIH funding. Also, with NIH funding comes the responsibility of the NIH rules (including free access to all lines, etc.).
The National Academy of Sciences recently released a report on stem cell research. One of the things they mentioned was that a strong set of guidelines needed to be established. The best source of these guidelines? NIH — through the power of their purse. In the absence of gov’t regulation, those with the funds will do whatever they want to (and can). A responsible gov’t policy on stem cell research will go a long way to protecting against the horror scenarios (cloned babies, etc.) postulated by the neo-luddites.
Finally, there are estimated to be over 400,000 frozen embryos in fertility clinics. Do these groups really expect to be able to line up another 399,979 families to “adopt” another embryo. Also — many of these embryos are “siblings” — multiple embryos from the same couple. Imagine the genetic implications if two of these “sibs”, raised by different families, met and decided to marry. There’d be almost no way to track this information.
Libertine
In my comments I usually try (successfully or not is up for debate, lol) to interject either wit, sarcasm or just some kind of glib comment…
I will be blunt here…the author of the article John quoted is a clueless f’ing idiot!!!
Parker
I am hoping that whatever research is done allows us at some point to get the (hoped for) good effects without the aspects that trouble some people of good conscience.
I think, ultimately, your stand on this depends on your belief about where life begins – and gets increasingly emotional from there.
What I have not yet been convinced of is that any of these opinions has been (or perhaps can be) proven to be the correct one – which means the argument seems ultimately based on beliefs rather than facts.
Such facts as there are tend to be used selectively – and a lot of mis-statements and conjecture get presented as fact on both sides.
I don’t see a way to resolve this argument. That said, I also don’t see why people who object to this research should be forced to pay for it.