Our “Culture of Death” President

President Obama is adding his stamp of approval to our “Culture of Death”. Our new chief executive has already overturned President Bush’s eight-year ban on using U.S. taxpayer dollars to support overseas family planning services (read abortion). Now there is word that he is expected to loosen the federal funding restrictions against embryonic stem cell research, restrictions that have been in place since August 2001. Few Americans realize that his actions are placing this nation on a slippery slope which will lead to scientific perversions, perversions that will make Huxley’s Brave New World look like Mister Roger’s Neighborhood.

Along with the other arguments against embryonic stem cell research–such as its failure to produce any positive results–is the long term damage it will inflict on efforts to ban, or even limit, abortions. Why? The more funding this research receives, the more test subjects will be needed. Although limited numbers of test subjects are not a problem at present, they will be at some point. Embryos will need to come from somewhere. What better way of guaranteeing a steady supply of test subjects than by allowing abortion mills to continue their grisly procedures? Do not be surprised if the government eventually solicits volunteers to undergo impregnation for the sole purpose of providing embryos for research. It will be eerily reminiscent of Hitler’s directive that Nazi women deliver as many children as possible, a directive that even rewarded medals to women who bred at least five children (Medicine in the Twentieth Century, Roger Cooter and John V. Pickstone, Harwood Academic Publishers p 562). Just as women in Nazi Germany were rewarded for selflessly giving birth for the Fatherland, so will American women be praised for selflessly conceiving for science.

Supporters of cloning will also benefit from the lifting of federal funding restrictions against embryonic stem cell research. After all if an embryo is not considered a human being and worthy of rights, why would anyone argue differently for clones? Americans will argue that cloning is an extension of the Roe vs. Wade “Right to Privacy” ruling. People will kick and scream that they have “the right to do what they want with their bodies”, including cloning them for the purpose of harvesting organs and stem cells. Picture Robin Cook’s Coma or the film “The Matrix”. That is where we are headed.

Pretty frightening, isn’t it? And you don’t need to be Nostradamus to envision it happening.

Thank you, Mr. President.


Donald Tremblay

An End in Themselves

In today’s Wall Street Journal Adam Keiper reviews Human: The Science Behind What Makes Us Unique. (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121547414111533875.html?mod=opinion_main_commentaries) Keiper says that author Michael S. Gazzaniga purports to argue that “modern neuroscience is on the brink of offering us real answers to these questions – answers more reliable and truthful than those that centuries of philosophy, religious tradition and literature have offered.” Yet, what is most interesting about the review is the concern Keiper raises at the conclusion of his column:

“More important, Mr. Gazzaniga does little to explore the implications of the research he describes. Once we have been armed with the latest scientific findings about how our brains came to be and how they function, how ought we to act?”

We find ourselves in that position today as a society. Embryonic stem-cell research, cloning, genetic engineering: all force us to consider the morality of “doing things just because we can”. We seem to have forgotten Immanuel Kant’s instruction to treat people as an end in themselves, and not as a means to an end. Using discarded embryos for research and cloning humans for the purpose of harvesting organs violate that piece of wisdom. And as we continue to make advancements in science there will be more opportunities for us to support whatever is viewed as “what’s best for society”. For ex, some insist that cures for terrible diseases such as Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s will be found if we only support embryonic research. Catholics must stand firm, no matter the temptation, and reject this utilitarian approach to life. Our responsibility is to defend those who cannot defend themselves:

“Science and technology by their very nature require unconditional respect for fundamental moral criteria. They must be at the service of the human person, of his inalienable rights, of his true and integral good, in conformity with the plan and the will of God.” (Catechism 2294)

Oh, and one side note: Any medical advancements resulting from stem cell research were made from ADULT stem cells. There has not been a single case of embryonic stem cells resulting in any scientific breakthrough. The truth is that the science behind it is specious. The next time someone argues that more money should be spent on this research, ask them why more private donations are not being made to support it. If this science is the cure-all that some claim it is, then it would be a gold mine for investors. Yet, investors are staying away. That should tell you something.

Donald Tremblay