Guest Post by DMP
One day in the future, someone in an embassy or palace in some third-world corner of the globe really will have control of a huge amount of some nation's sovereign wealth. One day this poor soul will find him/herself fleeing from a violent revolution. As a last desperate attempt to protect said sovereign wealth, this individual will randomly select a complete stranger (probably chosen off of Facebook because he or she has a "kind face" in a profile picture) to email and beg to be allowed access to that stranger's bank account, just to transfer all of that sovereign wealth out of danger.
It won't work of course, and all of the money in question will ultimately fall into the hands of the new dictator.
I'm not telling anyone to start trusting those emails. I'm just saying that one day it will happen, and do you want to be responsible for a huge windfall to a violent dictator?
Monday, October 12, 2009
Thursday, January 11, 2007
Stem Cells: Not Again
I heard on the news today that the House of Representatives has once again passed legislation to provide federal funding for embryonic stem cell research. The President has once again promised to veto the bill if it should pass in the Senate and reach his desk. The margin of victory in the house was not enough to override a veto, so the end result of this effort will be the same as the last one.
I just felt like I have to rant on the ridiculousness of this situation.
A large number of people are opposed to using embryonic stem cells because to use them requires the destruction of a fertilized embryo. If it were implanted in a womb, this embryo could then develop and become a living human person. Therefore, the destruction of the embryo is akin to abortion and therefore akin to murder and therefore very wrong.
Those in favor of advancing embryonic stem cell research are quick to point out only embryos already scheduled to be thrown out would be used in research. Since they are going to be destroyed anyway, what is the harm in putting them to good use.
This brings me to my first complaint about this whole argument.
Everyone who is arguing against this research, because it destroys potential human lives, is missing something important in their moral outrage. Is it really any worse to destroy the embryos in research than to simply allow them to be thrown out or wasted? It is still a potential human life that is prevented from developing. Logically, doesn't the actual crime occur during in vitro fertilization when numerous embryos are created with no intention of ever using all of them. If it is wrong to destroy them, then it must be wrong to knowingly create far more than you will ever use.
Having said that, I am against the bill that will now be sent to the Senate. Let me tell you why.
Those who argue in favor the the measures in debate, generally tend to gloss over or just ignore the fact that there are multiple sources of stem cells that can be used for research. They seem to be unaware of the fact that on the same day that federal funding for embryonic stem cell research was previously vetoed; federal funds were approved for cord blood and adult stem cell research. They fail to mention the fact that both of these sources are showing more promise of success than are embryonic stem cells, which regularly develop tumors.
What they do say gives the impression that anyone who is against this legislation wants to kill Michael J. Foxx and millions of other people who would be cured next week if this bill just got passed.
Again-- federal funding for other sources of stem cells has been approved. Embryonic stem cells form tumors. Add to that the fact that embryonic stem cell research is not banned, outlawed or halted in any way by this or any other legislation that anyone has attempted to bring before the houses of congress. Privately funded embryonic stem cell research is free to be carried out by anyone who wants to spend the money and the time on it.
Let's all just be honest people. The entire reason this issue is still open for debate is because it is similar to, and certainly carries implications for the future resolution of the abortion battle. Government endorsement of embryonic stem cell collection would be immediately used in support of fully legalized abortion.
The embryonic stem cell question is a battle ground for the abortion debate. Taken by itself, I don't want to see my tax dollars going toward the development of new and interesting tumors. That is the only purely embryonic stem cell issue that logically matters for the legislation in question.
That' s just my opinion.
I just felt like I have to rant on the ridiculousness of this situation.
A large number of people are opposed to using embryonic stem cells because to use them requires the destruction of a fertilized embryo. If it were implanted in a womb, this embryo could then develop and become a living human person. Therefore, the destruction of the embryo is akin to abortion and therefore akin to murder and therefore very wrong.
Those in favor of advancing embryonic stem cell research are quick to point out only embryos already scheduled to be thrown out would be used in research. Since they are going to be destroyed anyway, what is the harm in putting them to good use.
This brings me to my first complaint about this whole argument.
Everyone who is arguing against this research, because it destroys potential human lives, is missing something important in their moral outrage. Is it really any worse to destroy the embryos in research than to simply allow them to be thrown out or wasted? It is still a potential human life that is prevented from developing. Logically, doesn't the actual crime occur during in vitro fertilization when numerous embryos are created with no intention of ever using all of them. If it is wrong to destroy them, then it must be wrong to knowingly create far more than you will ever use.
Having said that, I am against the bill that will now be sent to the Senate. Let me tell you why.
Those who argue in favor the the measures in debate, generally tend to gloss over or just ignore the fact that there are multiple sources of stem cells that can be used for research. They seem to be unaware of the fact that on the same day that federal funding for embryonic stem cell research was previously vetoed; federal funds were approved for cord blood and adult stem cell research. They fail to mention the fact that both of these sources are showing more promise of success than are embryonic stem cells, which regularly develop tumors.
What they do say gives the impression that anyone who is against this legislation wants to kill Michael J. Foxx and millions of other people who would be cured next week if this bill just got passed.
Again-- federal funding for other sources of stem cells has been approved. Embryonic stem cells form tumors. Add to that the fact that embryonic stem cell research is not banned, outlawed or halted in any way by this or any other legislation that anyone has attempted to bring before the houses of congress. Privately funded embryonic stem cell research is free to be carried out by anyone who wants to spend the money and the time on it.
Let's all just be honest people. The entire reason this issue is still open for debate is because it is similar to, and certainly carries implications for the future resolution of the abortion battle. Government endorsement of embryonic stem cell collection would be immediately used in support of fully legalized abortion.
The embryonic stem cell question is a battle ground for the abortion debate. Taken by itself, I don't want to see my tax dollars going toward the development of new and interesting tumors. That is the only purely embryonic stem cell issue that logically matters for the legislation in question.
That' s just my opinion.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)