Wednesday, October 25, 2006

A compromise for the stem-cell debate

The stem cell debate has been in the news a lot recently with Michael J. Fox doing an ad in support of it, and some celebrities opposing it. ( I didn't want to pick one article, but do a Google News Search.

To be honest, I don't know all the details about stem cell research, and how much of it actually destroys human life. I am not advocating it in this post in anyway, but I wanted to offer a compromise.

Allow stem-cell research to continue. Anyone at anytime and anyplace can perform the research. Hospitals, universities, whoever can do the research.

And not only that, states are allowed to fund stem-cell research based on a direct vote by the people.

Oh wait, that's the current situation we have now.

Stem cell research is perfectly legal. Not only can private sector companies do it, but state governments can fund it. The only restriction is that of federal funding for certain stem cell lines. But for some people, that is not enough. If anything is remotely a good idea, we must throw the federal government at it.

The thing is, many of those who claim that I shouldn't "enforce my morality" on them concerning the stem-cell research debate don't have any problems with forcing someone to pay for research that they find morally repulsive.

My main preference is that no research happens that destroys human life. Again, I don't know much about it, but I know pro-life groups have a problem with it. But at the very least, don't make people pay for things they find morally repulsive. Now, I know some will say "but what about financing war that I disagree with?" Okay, fine, I understand. Many people have to pay for things they find morally repulsive with government. But just because some have to pay for some things against their will, shouldn't open the door for everything else the government tries to fund.

But, an objection I anticipate is that letting people die is also morally questionable, and this is a good objection. The argument would be that we should do all we can do, and if federal funding is an option, so be it. Throw in all the guns. But I wouldn't say that federal funding is guaranteed to improve medical research. I think many of us take it as a given that federal involvement and money always improves things; it seems like the intuitive answer, but I have also heard arguments that federal involvement makes medical research less effective. I won't go into all of them now, but I think it is an assumption worth examining.

Update:
Yes, preacherman, Rush Limbaugh is an idot.

8 comments:

preacherman said...

Great post.

First, I think Rush Limbough is an idot. It was so rude of him to acuse Micheal J. Fox of exagerating his sickness. The sickone is Rush. Micheal J. Fox is dying. Sick, sick, sick. Are republicans that desporate? I never thought they would make fun of someone dying for a political purpose. Crazy.

Second. I believe stem cells can help save lives and cure diseases. I agree we shouldn't destory human life for research but if the the aborted fetis is just going to thrown away and not used why not use it for something good. Some will say well then that will make abortion seem like something that is good. No. I believe people will get abortions no matter what.
There are also other ways to abtain stem cells for research. We should do what we can to cure cancer, and other diseases. Imagine if Christopher Reeve did get the stem cells he needed. How many paralized people would have better life's.

I don't know.
I don't know if we will ever have all the answers and will ever do what needs to be done.

Great post.

Josh said...

I agree... It should be up to the states... same as the border control issues... let the states vote on it.

Anonymous said...

Preacher, want to go out for a beer later tonight? I'll bring the painkillers.

Anonymous said...

Preacherman and others.....please read ALL THE FACTS before assuming what you hear on liberal news shows is accurate.

preacherman said...

Anonymous,

I saw and heard Rush himself say what he did. How dare he. He is to dumb to attack the subject instead he has to attack the messager...Isn't that how it is in conservative talk radio. Attack the messenger. Cut off all logical agurements before people hear the truth.

Anonymous said...

Preacherman,

Do you know what context he was saying it? NO, because you saw it on a liberal station....oh wait, that's right, liberals are all supreme and would never protray a conservative in the negative light.

When we study the Bible, it's important to look at the context something was said or done, correct? I have seen you post that a lot......well, as with everything else.....the portion you saw of what he said was played out of context and disstorted by the liberal media.

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/eibessential3/mjf0/mjf/anchorman_3.guest.html

Sorry to completely get off the topic, but it's frustrating when people get on their high-horse about something, but don't have all the facts.

Wasp Jerky said...

What's irritating to me about the debate is this: oftentimes the very same people who say that stem cell research is bad because it means destroying lives to save lives are the ones who wanted to go Iraq, even though it meant destroying lives to save lives. You can't have it both ways.

Anonymous said...

I feel Rush Limbough is worse that an idiot. He should be blessed with Parkinson Diesease as badly as Micheal J Fox is. Where does he get off critizing and accusing him of putting on. Here he abuses drugs himself but has to stoop so low as to treat someone that really has no choice of how he can control his movement like they have to be faking. What a low life person. I really hope that they can find a cure for Micheal before it is too late for him.