Stem Cell Research

When I BLOG on a topic not of a personal or family nature, it is usually a result of listening to the news or NPR on my drive into work. Lately I have been listening to Johnboy and Billy on my drive in so I my mind has been pretty much emptied of anything significant in nature when I sit down in front of my computer.

Today however the topic of stem cell research was in the news, again. The debate, or at least the most prevalent of the debates, as I understand it, is over the the use of human embryos, regardless of the source or disposition, in medical research.

On one side of the argument are the medical / scientific communities. Their assertion is that stem cell research shows great promise in facilitating, if not directly contributing to the cure for a significant number of diseases and physical maladies including Parkinson's and Alzheimer's diseases, spinal cord injury, stroke, burns, heart disease, diabetes, osteoarthritis, and rheumatoid arthritis. The greatest promise lay in embryonic stem cells research because they are unique in that the have the ability to evolve themselves into a 'specialty' cell; A liver cell or a skin cell or spinal cord cell for example. Thus providing a means to therapeutically replace damaged or diseased cells. Adult stem cells, apparently do not have this unique property. ( I am admittedly ignorant in the difference here. )

The main opposing force to the scientific community is, what I will classify, for lack of perhaps a more accurate term, as the 'morality assertion'. The most vocal opponents are the self proclaimed "pro-lifers". Their primary objection to using embryonic stem cells is that is is destroying human life. They further stipulate that embryonic research is not necessary; mature stem cells provide an adequate alternative vehicle for medical community's stated purposes for the research.

whether or not human embryos should be used for research isn't really what has earned my indignation this morning. The most offensive part of this debate, to me, is the "I don't want my tax dollars being use in the destruction of human life" argument.

Lets remove the "destruction of human life" part of this argument, just for a moment. Think of all of the government activities, activities paid for by your and my tax dollars. How many of those programs and activities do you, personally, believe to be a waste of money or even more appropriately, morally reprehensible?

Now bring back the "destruction of human life" factor into the argument. How much of our National budget (read our tax dollars) is committed to the destruction of Human life or the potential destruction of Human life? I canvassed several internet sites; some government sponsored and some 'activist' sponsored sites. From what I gather, it is a conservative estimate that in FY2006 the pentagon will spend more than $420 Billion dollars on the Military.

Before you jump down my throat and tell me that our military is about saving lives and human suffering, not taking lives. I agree that our military is a vital part of the well being of our country and in fact contributes to the well being of a significant percentage of all world citizens. But the fact is we arm our troops with the ability to destroy human life; right or wrong. Our troops sacrifice their lives so all Americans can be secure and live the American dream. But American lives are lost; right or wrong.

Apply the same logic to Embryonic stem cell research. Assuming there is reasonable scientific evidence that significant breakthroughs in medical treatment and disease control can be made through the judicious use of embryonic stem cells. Some potential lives would be lost for the greater good of humanity; right or wrong. "The difference is that solders make a conscious decision to lay down their lives." I will, for sake of argument, concede this somewhat dubious point. However, in most cases at least, these 'lives' are being discarded regardless; as a waste product of invitro fertilization, miscarriages or aborted pregnancies. You cannot say the same thing about the child who is killed in the exchange of gunfire on the streets of Baghdad.

The irony here is that many of the polititians that are against the stem cell research are on record in support of the US involvement in IRAQ.

I am not a student of government, politics, economics or sociology. So I have to trust that there are enough folks more knowledgeable than me running our government. I have to trust that there will be a balance of ideologies in any debate over and/or implementation of public policy so these policies truly represent the best interest of the country, its citizens and ... well to an extent the rest of the world. What scares me is there appears to be a trend in government, on both sides of the isle mind you, to remove, or squelch opposing ideologies in government rather than to seriously consider opposing views. That is my perception anyway.

Embryonic Stem Cell research... That was the topic right?