Oh, for the Love of Monkeys

[forsyth]

Okay, so this biotech company goes to great lengths to assuage the totally hypocritical complaints of fundamentalists about stem cell research, right? They create a way to extract just one cell, from an embryo with 8, okay? So what's the reaction from fundamentalists? Let me quote the Seattle Times.

"Social conservatives already have begun complaining that the new technique falls short. They say the method does injure nascent embryos, and they question whether the cell that is removed from an embryo has the potential to develop on its own.""The new study ... raises more ethical questions than answers," said Richard Doerflinger of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops.
...
Doerflinger said the safety of the single-cell biopsy procedure had not been scientifically established.
"Some embryos do not survive the process, and some survivors may have long-term effects later in life," he said."

So obviously, the answer is to ban it so we can't scientifically test it! Err. Wait.

Well, what does the President think? We all know how much concern he has for human life, after all.
"President Bush offered little encouragement Wednesday and, if anything, raised the bar higher, suggesting he would not be comfortable unless embryos were not involved at all.

"Any use of human embryos for research purposes raises serious ethical concerns," a statement released by the White House said. "The president is hopeful that with time scientists can find ways of deriving cells like those now derived from human embryos but without the need for using embryos.""

Um. Wow. Just on the scientific standpoint, the idiocy there is staggering. And the hypocrisy. Leaving aside the huge numbers of embryos just thrown out by fertility clinics, the only way to produce stem cells without using embryos would involve genetic engineering and other biotech that I'd be willing to bet Bush would be against too. But of course he can't just come out and oppose stem cell research and biotech in general, 1) because that'd be even more unpopular than anything else, since he'd be opposing life-saving technologies, and 2) because neither he nor any of his advisers actually have the slightest clue about science. So instead we get this bullshit smokescreen about "ethical issues" and the "inherent dignity of human life," which only lasts until they're born. For fuck's sake.

Slacktivist has more, of course.

Comments

[kalifla.livejournal.com]

I was ECSTATIC when I learned they could do this with one extracted cell.

That is still more life-promoting than killing one life to possibly prevent other deaths. This is the next stage to EVERYTHING GOOD ABOUT THE THEORY.

Bah. This project is enhancing human dignity.

"Lasts until they're born" indeed. :P

[forsythferret.livejournal.com]

Hey, the Bush crew and the Falwell crew and all the other crazy fundamentalists are all about "protecting children" when they're masses of undifferentiated cells, but once they pop out of the womb, screw 'em. No medical care, support, etc. It's never been about "the smallest members of our human family" or whatever the buzzwords are, it's about making sure those slutty women who go and have sex "pay the price." Witness their opposition to andy kind of birth control, the HPV vaccine, etc, etc, etc. I'm sure there's some sincere members of their groups, but the leaders are all hypocritcial lying demagouges.

[kalifla.livejournal.com]

Really? Falwell's group said that?

That makes me sad.

Course, in my line of work we have to tread very carefully in between giving support and not being taken in by the people who just don't care yet...

[forsythferret.livejournal.com]

I don't know if Falwell specifically said that. He probably could have, though. He's just the first person I think of when I think of scary fundamentalists. And no, most of them don't say women who have sex are dirty sluts, but they talk about "consequences" of sex when they're opposing condoms and birth control pills and the HPV innoculation and all that kind of stuff. And they continue to support politicians who are for cutting Head Start and Medicaid and programs offering medical care to unwed mothers and promote "abstinence only education" and all the rest of that claptrap, so it's not really a jump to say they're not really concerned about the children or the women.

[kalifla.livejournal.com]

I really don't get the cutting off of medical aid, not yet. But Abstinence does need to be taught. It's the SINGLE most effective way to avoid inducing bad things.
My mother, for one thing, was on FIVE separate types of birth control when she became pregnant with my younger brother. Things can fail.

Urgh. How can they oppose inoculation?

[forsythferret.livejournal.com]

Like I said, my working theory is they want to control women's sex lives, and figure any "dirty slut" should have to deal with the "consequences" of sex. Like babies and possibly cancer and things. Which, in their worldview, I guess marriage magically prevents? Just like marriage would mean there's no reason to use birth control.

And I don't mind teaching abstinence, as a part of the overall sex ed class. But making it the ONLY thing you teach is a recipe for disaster. And that's what many of these "family" groups are in favor of, because they claim teaching kids antyhing else will be like giving them permission to have sex. Evidently they don't remember being teenagers very well. So they try and just terrify kids with a list of "IF YOU HAVE SEX YOU WILL GET PREGNANT AND SIX DISEASES AND DIE".

The same with the HPV vaccine. They oppose making it one of the regular innoculations because it would "encourage" kids to have sex. Uh huh. Right. And it only works BEFORE peope are exposed to it, so logically shouldn't they get it BEFORE they have sex?

[kalifla.livejournal.com]

I can't imagine the innoculations doing any harm whatsoever. The teenagers (and sometimes the children, ew) are having sex already. I am all for preventative.

And because I'm for preventative, the terror is well-placed. There is too much that can go wrong. XD And too much grossness, even if you DON'T catch a terminal disease. You can still have to live with a stigma like herpes for the rest of your life and have to tell (or not tell) your partner every time.