Stem Cells
Yesterday, President Bush issued his first veto in his 5 and a half year term against the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act of 2005 (H.R. 810). The Bill proposed to modify the restrictions on federal research funding of stem cells. The current law only allows federal funding to be used on the 22 available stem cell lines, most of which are contaminated and unusable. The vetoed bill proposed to allow embryonic stem cell research to be conducted on excess embryos that are created by in vitro fertilization clinics and are going to be discarded anyway. The Stem Cell Research Bill was passed by large margins in both the House and Senate, but not large enough margins to overrule a presidential veto.
President Bush based his veto on moral grounds. He claimed that he did not want to sacrifice innocent life in order to boost scientific research. But what is President Bush's moral ground for vetoing the bill?
The President knows how beneficial stem cell research can be to solving some of the most difficult medical issues. The bill specifically limits new lines of stem cells to embryos that are going to be created and discarded regardless of the bill. Due to the President's religious beliefs he feels that life begins at conception and that all embryos have a soul and should be considered of equal worth to a born human being. This is purely a theological belief that has no medical or scientific basis. Any reputable Doctor knows enough about anatomy to know that senteince and cognition do not occur in these embryos. Thus, the president does not want to use federal funds to support the bill based on an unprovable faith.
Although everyone should be entitled to the faith of their choice, federal policy should not be based on beliefs that are unprovable. Federal Policy should be limited to arguments based on reason and evidence. Values are extremely important, but only values that you are able to ground in the real world, with reason.
Reason says, that these embryos are going to be created and discarded for in vitro fertilization and can either be used to help people who suffer from various illnesses or they can not. Medical Science also shows that these embryos are not sentient and are largely just a group of cells. The Humans that illnesses can be helped are sentient. Can we honestly put the rights of a group of non-sentient cells that only have the potential to become human life above the interest of sentient people? Furthermore, the cells are going to be discarded anyway. In my opinion, your values are skewed if you believe non-sentient cells that are going to be destroyed anyways have more rights than humans that are sick and the stem cell research can save their lives.
President Bush based his veto on moral grounds. He claimed that he did not want to sacrifice innocent life in order to boost scientific research. But what is President Bush's moral ground for vetoing the bill?
The President knows how beneficial stem cell research can be to solving some of the most difficult medical issues. The bill specifically limits new lines of stem cells to embryos that are going to be created and discarded regardless of the bill. Due to the President's religious beliefs he feels that life begins at conception and that all embryos have a soul and should be considered of equal worth to a born human being. This is purely a theological belief that has no medical or scientific basis. Any reputable Doctor knows enough about anatomy to know that senteince and cognition do not occur in these embryos. Thus, the president does not want to use federal funds to support the bill based on an unprovable faith.
Although everyone should be entitled to the faith of their choice, federal policy should not be based on beliefs that are unprovable. Federal Policy should be limited to arguments based on reason and evidence. Values are extremely important, but only values that you are able to ground in the real world, with reason.
Reason says, that these embryos are going to be created and discarded for in vitro fertilization and can either be used to help people who suffer from various illnesses or they can not. Medical Science also shows that these embryos are not sentient and are largely just a group of cells. The Humans that illnesses can be helped are sentient. Can we honestly put the rights of a group of non-sentient cells that only have the potential to become human life above the interest of sentient people? Furthermore, the cells are going to be discarded anyway. In my opinion, your values are skewed if you believe non-sentient cells that are going to be destroyed anyways have more rights than humans that are sick and the stem cell research can save their lives.
posted by David at 12:48 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home