I never guessed that being a pro-science research geek would make me feel so subversive. Gotta love the right wing. I feel even more radical than I did during my leather wearing bi girl days.
Yes, in Bushworld, scientists are going to have to creep around like some persecuted sect of heretics. And other countries will surge ahead, leaving our nation a technological backwater.
Or, we can throw these idiots out of office.
9:05 AM, July 20, 2006
Anonymous said...
This “Progressive” neo-eugenics mentality is very creepy.
I don't like George Bush and his neo-con war either but the lack of ethical seriousness from liberals on this issue is very revealing.
Hmm. I disagree that this is a "neo-eugenics" mentality. My understanding of eugenics is that it involves selecting/forcing people to breed or not breed according to some set of criteria about who is superior to who. Embryonic stem cell research is about finding treatments for a range of diseases and ailments that cause an enormous amount of suffering and death and currently have inadequate remedies. It isn't about controlling who gets to reproduce and who doesn't.
I'm sorry you feel that liberals "lack ethical seriousness" on this. Perhaps my sarcastic attacks on the Bush position on this make you think I am not serious about this. I am actually quite serious. I just fundamentally disagree with the Bush position on the moral status of these embryos: I know they are clusters of human cells which could develop into a fetus, but in the state in which they would be destroyed they do not possess any qualities that I think would entitle them to the status and rights of a human being. I understand how this area can be a bit creepy, as it does involve manipulating very fundamental aspects of our own biology. But I don't think an absolute ban on federal research on additional stem cell lines is a proper response.
So please don't mistake my snarky tone for lack of seriousness. I feel very strongly about this issue.
9:15 AM, July 21, 2006
Anonymous said...
Hi Zach,
"My understanding of eugenics is that it involves selecting/forcing people to breed or not breed according to some set of criteria about who is superior to who."
“Eugenics is a social philosophy which advocates the improvement of human hereditary traits through various forms of intervention. The purported goals have variously been to create healthier, more intelligent people, save society's resources, and lessen human suffering. Earlier proposed means of achieving these goals focused on selective breeding while modern ones focus on prenatal testing and screening, genetic counseling, birth control, in vitro fertilization, and genetic engineering” Wikapedia
Most of the goals of eugenics sound pretty good (End suffering and create healthier more intelligent people). It is the means that create the ethical & moral dilemmas. A hundred years ago it was breeding. Today it’s prenatal testing, genetic counseling, in vitro fertilization, genetic engineering and now embryonic stem-cell therapy.
It is a common fallacy to make an emotional appeal to justify one’s actions. “I’m doing it to end suffering and early death.” Nobody is against that. Trying to find remedies that limit suffering and death (Heh! Remedy for death?) is noble and important work. But there are worse things than suffering from illness and death. I think the suffering and death of those whose only crime is that they have no voice to defend themselves is a greater evil. It’s the cripples that the Nazis decided to euthanize to end their suffering and remove the burden they placed on society and their families. I think a greater evil is the near term babies that are aborted because the doctor has detected trisomy 21(Downs Syndrome). I suppose these peoples lives are of little value too. Hey! Maybe if we can find some way to harvest their organs for our benefit we will allow them to reproduce themselves.
There is plenty of potential in adult stem cells. There are now some researchers that believe they will soon be able to synthesize stem cells with the same potential as those found in the embryo.
Hey, I like Michael J. Fox too! But I’m not going to follow him down this dark, ghoulish path. Leave my tax money out of it.
9:46 PM, July 21, 2006
Well, Bush vetoed his first bill, the one lifting the federal ban on embryonic stem cell research. I guess Nancy Reagan’s pleading was insufficient. Gotta protect those blastulae (that would be thrown away anyway) from all those evil scientists trying to cure Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s. Kos is all over it. We should hang this around the necks of the Republicans in 2006 and 2008. Or better yet, see if we can override the veto, and then hang it around the Republicans’ necks.
P.S.: My wife says Bush is a “stupid mo-fo” for doing this.
Update: Slacktivist has a good post on this: This is what President Bush means by a "moral boundary." He believes that these embryos must never be used for research, because morality demands that they be tossed in the trash with yesterday's coffee grounds.
Update II: Slacktivist again: Let me repeat this in blunter terms.
Here is what President Bush said yesterday in defense of his veto of Rep. Mike Castle's bill allowing federal funding of embryonic stem cell research:
This bill would support the taking of innocent human life in the hope of finding medical benefits for others. It crosses a moral boundary that our decent society needs to respect, so I vetoed it. ...
Embryonic stem cells come from human embryos that are destroyed for their cells. Each of these human embryos is a unique human life with inherent dignity and matchless value. ...
This is nonsense.
1. Countless thousands of frozen human embryos are regularly destroyed at fertility clinics.
2. President Bush claims to believe that these embryos are human lives "with inherent dignity and matchless value."
3. Therefore, President Bush has vetoed a bill that would have allowed the federal government to fund research that would use some few of these thousands of frozen embryos for research, instead of their being destroyed along with the many other thousands of embryos.
4. If No. 2 above were true, No. 3 would be an obscenely modest response. No one who genuinely believed what President Bush claims to believe could possibly be satisfied with such a response.
5. Therefore, President Bush is lying, or he does not fully understand the inescapable moral obligation demanded by his position, or he does not care about the inescapable moral obligation demanded by his position. He is a liar, a fool or a casual bystander whose inaction implicitly endorses what he believes is mass murder.
posted by Zachary Drake at 12:07 AM on Jul 20, 2006
"Science and health vs. rights of the blastula: Bush choses latter"
5 Comments -
I never guessed that being a pro-science research geek would make me feel so subversive. Gotta love the right wing. I feel even more radical than I did during my leather wearing bi girl days.
7:50 AM, July 20, 2006
Yes, in Bushworld, scientists are going to have to creep around like some persecuted sect of heretics. And other countries will surge ahead, leaving our nation a technological backwater.
Or, we can throw these idiots out of office.
9:05 AM, July 20, 2006
This “Progressive” neo-eugenics mentality is very creepy.
I don't like George Bush and his neo-con war either but the lack of ethical seriousness from liberals on this issue is very revealing.
3:50 AM, July 21, 2006
Hmm. I disagree that this is a "neo-eugenics" mentality. My understanding of eugenics is that it involves selecting/forcing people to breed or not breed according to some set of criteria about who is superior to who. Embryonic stem cell research is about finding treatments for a range of diseases and ailments that cause an enormous amount of suffering and death and currently have inadequate remedies. It isn't about controlling who gets to reproduce and who doesn't.
I'm sorry you feel that liberals "lack ethical seriousness" on this. Perhaps my sarcastic attacks on the Bush position on this make you think I am not serious about this. I am actually quite serious. I just fundamentally disagree with the Bush position on the moral status of these embryos: I know they are clusters of human cells which could develop into a fetus, but in the state in which they would be destroyed they do not possess any qualities that I think would entitle them to the status and rights of a human being. I understand how this area can be a bit creepy, as it does involve manipulating very fundamental aspects of our own biology. But I don't think an absolute ban on federal research on additional stem cell lines is a proper response.
So please don't mistake my snarky tone for lack of seriousness. I feel very strongly about this issue.
9:15 AM, July 21, 2006
Hi Zach,
"My understanding of eugenics is that it involves selecting/forcing people to breed or not breed according to some set of criteria about who is superior to who."
“Eugenics is a social philosophy which advocates the improvement of human hereditary traits through various forms of intervention. The purported goals have variously been to create healthier, more intelligent people, save society's resources, and lessen human suffering. Earlier proposed means of achieving these goals focused on selective breeding while modern ones focus on prenatal testing and screening, genetic counseling, birth control, in vitro fertilization, and genetic engineering” Wikapedia
Most of the goals of eugenics sound pretty good (End suffering and create healthier more intelligent people). It is the means that create the ethical & moral dilemmas. A hundred years ago it was breeding. Today it’s prenatal testing, genetic counseling, in vitro fertilization, genetic engineering and now embryonic stem-cell therapy.
It is a common fallacy to make an emotional appeal to justify one’s actions. “I’m doing it to end suffering and early death.” Nobody is against that. Trying to find remedies that limit suffering and death (Heh! Remedy for death?) is noble and important work. But there are worse things than suffering from illness and death. I think the suffering and death of those whose only crime is that they have no voice to defend themselves is a greater evil. It’s the cripples that the Nazis decided to euthanize to end their suffering and remove the burden they placed on society and their families. I think a greater evil is the near term babies that are aborted because the doctor has detected trisomy 21(Downs Syndrome). I suppose these peoples lives are of little value too. Hey! Maybe if we can find some way to harvest their organs for our benefit we will allow them to reproduce themselves.
There is plenty of potential in adult stem cells. There are now some researchers that believe they will soon be able to synthesize stem cells with the same potential as those found in the embryo.
Hey, I like Michael J. Fox too! But I’m not going to follow him down this dark, ghoulish path. Leave my tax money out of it.
9:46 PM, July 21, 2006