Dem wants human cloning
Oct 15th, 2009 by David Anderson
In spite of the fact that science has outpaced the embryonic stem cell research debate with superior adult stem cells taking the lead, the administration and its lackeys in Congress including our own Mr. Castle, insist on diverting research and tax money to destroying human life.
Now some in Congress insist on human cloning.
Rep. Diana DeGette, a Colorado Democrat, will soon introduce the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act of 2009.
DeGette, as the Washington Post did in a supportive weekend editorial, will likely tout the legislation as a was to codify, or make as permanent law, Obama’s decision. That means a future pro-life president would not be able to undo the decision with another executive order.
But, DeGette’s measure will likely go further and “enhance” or promote human cloning and the destruction of human embryos.
DeGette introduced a similar bill earlier this year that would allow NIH to invest in other kinds of research — perhaps including so-called “therapeutic cloning,” which is human cloning done for dubious research purposes. Otherwise known as somatic cell nuclear transfer, it is the kind of human cloning in which scientists purposefully create days-old human embryos — unique human beings — for the sole purpose of killing them for research.
DeGette told Congressional Quarterly in April that her legislation could open the door to allowing the Obama administration to force taxpayers to finance human cloning if the National Institutes of Health doesn’t move ahead on its own, which it did not do, despite a claim by the Washington Post that it did.
Dave,
I want to ask just a couple of things about “embryonic stem cell research” from the perspective of someone who is NOT (hold on to your hats you DL readers) ideologically opposed to the concept.
1.) If…(it’s a big if but stay with me) the embryos are either…
A.) Unused embryos from a fertility clinic that would be destroyed if not used to promote research that COULD result in the saving of millions of lives later, what’s the harm in at least making the destruction of those embryo’s (remember, they WILL be destroyed no matter what) at least a contribution?
2.) If the embryonic stem cells were cloned only for the propogation of the cells to continue research without the destruction of more embryos is that a bad thing and why?
Unfortunately, I do not have time to address your question with the seriousness it deserves. This is only a brief answer.
1. a. You fell for a myth. The embryos are not currently being destroyed in most clinics. They are saved for later use and if released adopted to other families. Now the current backlog is unacceptable and the practice of fertilizing 8 or 9 eggs when only 1 baby is wanted should be restricted. It is a moral outrage.
If it is as you assume that they will be destroyed, why are they not now destroyed as long as they are viable?
2. The Congress person is not talking about the cloning of stem cells which has been done with federal funds since the Bush order of 2001. She is advocating the cloning of embryos which has been ruled inethical. It is the cloning of entire human beings. The idea is to clone them, experiment on them, then kill them. As long as they are not allowed to be born or in some bills implanted, the fact that human cloning would be allowed would be ignored.
3. The science has found other ways of producing stem cells that are far better from marrow, teeth and skin. You can use the donor’s cells and eliminate rejection, incompatibility, cancer like growths, and it is cheaper and faster.
4. The diversion of federal money to methods rejected by the private sector actually hinders cures by diverting researchers from more promising endeavors to fulfill a political agenda.