Politicizing Stem-Cell Research

Beldar · 03-10-2009, 11:11 AM

From the WSJ:

Robert George and Eric Cohen Say Barack Obama Has Politicized Stem-Cell Research - WSJ.com

kentuckymom · 03-10-2009, 11:19 AM

Excellent article, Beldar, thanks for posting.

Some quotes from it:

Quote:

The announcement was classic Obama: advancing radical policies while seeming calm and moderate, and preaching the gospel of civility while accusing those who disagree with the policies of being "divisive" and even "politicizing science."...

..."Moderate" Mr. Obama's policy is not. It will promote a whole new industry of embryo creation and destruction, including the creation of human embryos by cloning for research in which they are destroyed. It forces American taxpayers, including those who see the deliberate taking of human life in the embryonic stage as profoundly unjust, to be complicit in this practice.

Mr. Obama made a big point in his speech of claiming to bring integrity back to science policy, and his desire to remove the previous administration's ideological agenda from scientific decision-making. This claim of taking science out of politics is false and misguided on two counts.

First, the Obama policy is itself blatantly political. It is red meat to his Bush-hating base, yet pays no more than lip service to recent scientific breakthroughs that make possible the production of cells that are biologically equivalent to embryonic stem cells without the need to create or kill human embryos. Inexplicably -- apart from political motivations -- Mr. Obama revoked not only the Bush restrictions on embryo destructive research funding, but also the 2007 executive order that encourages the National Institutes of Health to explore non-embryo-destructive sources of stem cells.

Second and more fundamentally, the claim about taking politics out of science is in the deepest sense antidemocratic. The question of whether to destroy human embryos for research purposes is not fundamentally a scientific question; it is a moral and civic question about the proper uses, ambitions and limits of science. It is a question about how we will treat members of the human family at the very dawn of life; about our willingness to seek alternative paths to medical progress that respect human dignity.

For those who believe in the highest ideals of deliberative democracy, and those who believe we mistreat the most vulnerable human lives at our own moral peril, Mr. Obama's claim of "taking politics out of science" should be lamented, not celebrated.

Hunt · 03-10-2009, 11:52 AM

Reversing what the other guy did is "politicizing" it? OOOOkay. But sure, it's political in the sense that Obama said he would do this if he won the election, and he won the election.

kentuckymom · 03-10-2009, 12:04 PM

Yes, we know he won and he can. But, simply put:
(1) Millions did not vote for Obama.

(2) Did all of the voters who did vote for him agree with this change in policy?

and most importantly, this "non-political" fact:
(3) "...recent scientific breakthroughs that make possible the production of cells that are biologically equivalent to embryonic stem cells without the need to create or kill human embryos."

-Allmusic- · 03-10-2009, 12:35 PM

HUndreds of thousands of embryos are sitting in cold storage in IVF labs. How to discard of the unneeded embryos is a huge ethical consideration, since people are loathe to "throw them away" (although many have been discarded). Usage of these unwanted embryos for scientific purposes, in order to find cures for diseases and save lives, is the most humane thing to do. We should be cheering this news. I know I am.

3togo · 03-10-2009, 12:38 PM

Quote:

Yes, we know he won and he can. But, simply put:
(1) Millions did not vote for Obama.

(2) Did all of the voters who did vote for him agree with this change in policy?

and how was it different when Regean, Bush I, and Bush II entered office and immediately implemented policies that millions of americans disagreed with? ... the spoils of winning the election (along with the biggy - selecting supreme court justices). In addition, I expect this president will be more respectful of the limits of what presidents have the power to unilaterally change than the last president was.

kentuckymom · 03-10-2009, 12:43 PM

Quote:

In addition, I expect this president will be more respectful of the limits of what presidents have the power to unilaterally change than the last president was.

Oh my goodness. Where do I start?

Columbia_Student · 03-10-2009, 12:44 PM

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/09/us...09stem.html?hp

Quote:

The officials, who provided details of the announcement Mr. Obama will make Monday at the White House, said the president would leave it to Congress to determine whether the long-standing legislative ban on federal financing for human embryo experiments should also be overturned.

.....

The ban, known as the Dickey-Wicker amendment, first became law in 1996, and has been renewed by Congress every year since. It specifically bans the use of tax dollars to create human embryos — a practice that is routine in private fertility clinics — or for research in which embryos are destroyed, discarded or knowingly subjected to risk of injury.

At first, the ban stood in the way of taxpayer-financed embryonic stem cell research, because embryos are destroyed when stem cells are extracted from them. But in August 2001, in a careful compromise, President Bush opened the door a tiny crack, by ordering that tax dollars could be used for studies on a small number of lines, or colonies, of stem cells already extracted from embryos — so long as federal researchers did not do the extraction themselves.

mini · 03-10-2009, 12:49 PM

Another salvo from yet another Rupert Rag.

Hunt · 03-10-2009, 12:52 PM

The New York Times article also mentions that Bush twice vetoed legislation that would have altered his order. How's that for unilateral? So it's just silly to say that Obama is politicizing this issue--it's been a political issue for a long time.

mini · 03-10-2009, 01:18 PM

It is a political decision - in the best sense of the term - the polis has spoken, and the executive is carrying out their expressed wishes. Deliberative democracy at its very finest.

Hindoo · 03-10-2009, 01:22 PM

I'm 100% with Nancy Reagan on this one.

pugmadkate · 03-10-2009, 01:43 PM

As am I, Hindoo.

Quote:

The New York Times article also mentions that Bush twice vetoed legislation that would have altered his order. How's that for unilateral?...

Took the words right out of my mouth. I celebrate the return of science to it's rightful place. It's a campaign promise I was counting on.

Son of Opie · 03-10-2009, 01:45 PM

I think, given that most of the embryos in question have been in storage for some time and are not likely ever going to be used for pregnancy (or they would have been already), that they should be viewed the same way as cadavers are for medical school anatomy classes. Not something to be treated lightly, but nonetheless a valuable learning tool that can help advance knowledge.

kentuckymom · 03-10-2009, 02:07 PM

Discussing the use of long-stored embryos is one thing, but what about the creation of new ones, purely for research?