Demystifying the embryonic stem-cell debate for the Chron
Sen. Bill Frist (R), no doubt a Chron editorial board "bad guy" for his role in the Terri Schiavo affair, is now in the good graces of the editorial board for his recent change of heart on embyronic stem-cell research:
Skilled enough to transplant human hearts, Republican Sen. Bill Frist is not the sort to make rash decisions. So when the Senate majority leader and noted surgeon announced support for embryonic stem cell research last week, Capitol Hill watchers scratched their heads.
For four years, Frist backed President Bush's view that research on human embryonic stem cells constitutes the taking of life. Politically, this held some benefit: Frist is considering a 2008 presidential bid. Many of Bush's supporters passionately oppose embryonic stem cell research.
From an ethical and medical standpoint, however, Frist's opposition to stem cell research was mystifying.
Well, let's clear up the mystery for the editorial idealists -- help them ascend from the cave, if you will.
And who better to do that than another doctor in the Senate, maverick Republican Tom Coburn from Oklahoma:
As a practicing physician and two-time cancer survivor, I am intrigued by the potential of embryonic stem cell research. However, liberalizing President Bush's stem cell policy would be both unethical and unnecessary.
The bill Majority Leader Bill Frist recently endorsed would, for the first time, direct the federal government to use taxpayer dollars to destroy human embryos. This proposal is based on a false hope. Not a single treatment has been developed from embryonic stem cells. Yet more than 60 treatments have been developed from stem cells in umbilical cord blood and adult tissues.
[snip]
At the dawn of what will likely be the biotech century, advocating taxpayer-funded destructive experimentation on human embryos that will be "thrown away anyway" would set us on a dangerous course. If human life is sacred, but not worthy of protection when it is unwanted or destined for destruction, then many human lives, like those of the terminally ill or severely handicapped, would be cheapened and endangered.
We can certainly debate Dr. Coburn's contentions, but they aren't mystifying.
Posted by Kevin Whited @ 08/05/05 07:50 AM | Print |
Previous Entry | Home | Next Entry
ADVERTISING
DISCLAIMER
All content © 2004-09, blogHOUSTON and the respective authors.
blogHOUSTON.net is powered by Nucleus.
Site design and Nucleus customization are by Kevin Whited.