After reading that the University of Georgia (my alma mater) is receiving a $9.2 million grant to fund embryonic stem cell research, I wrote this post to the Atlanta Business Chronicle’s article:
True service to humanity begins with respect for human life. Since embryonic stem cells are obtained by destroying an embryonic human being in its early development, this type of research is gravely immoral. Shame on UGA and the NIH for their involvement in this deliberate killing of human life!
On June 13 of this year, the US Conference of Catholic Bishops approved a new statement on the topic of embryonic stem cell research (PDF 100K). Two weeks later, Richard Doerflinger wrote a great article, “Why the Embryo Matters,” which explains why it was important for the bishops to have issued this statement at this time:
Two things are new. First, the national policy debate is about to be renewed in a more intense way. Next year a new Congress and President will face this issue, and currently no presidential nominee supports President Bush’s position against funding stem cell research that requires destroying human embryos. This is a good time to remind Catholics and others what is at stake.
Second, this debate has reached a turning point in the scientific and medical community, though many politicians are slow to notice this. For years, the pro-life movement has said there are other and better ways to pursue the medical promise of stem cell research. It has become increasingly obvious that this is exactly right. Stem cells from adult tissues and umbilical cord blood have been used in clinical trials to repair heart damage, restore sight, and treat conditions like multiple sclerosis and juvenile diabetes. A new technique for “reprogramming” adult cells has produced cells with the properties of embryonic stem cells, without creating or destroying embryos – and prominent experts are abandoning embryo research in favor of this approach.
The article concedes that new technologies won’t simply make the embryonic-versus-adult-cell debate go away. But the hope is that talk of the supposed “unique promise” of embryonic research “may die down enough to allow the moral argument to be heard. If we have two promising ways to advance medicine, and one of them is free of moral problems, wouldn’t everyone prefer that route?”
As usual one problem begets another. If a person has a medical disorder and they knowingly use a treatment founded on the use of stem cell research what is the moral implication?
As a person with a child with a neurological disorder I know the feeling of “wanting a cure”. But at what cost? Certainly not this.
Should then a Catholic shun a cure if they know stem cell research was used to come to the end resulting cure? Just something to ponder.
Thanks for writing this. THis reminds me I need to check the status of what schools position is on this and what they are receiving