“Progressive” response to veto of stem cell bill

Well, I got myself an email inbox full of excrement ever since I decided to post a comment to campusprogress.org.  In order to comment, I had to register, which automatically signs you up for their email newsletters.  While I admit, it gives me a glimpse of what is being pushed on college campuses these days, it is disheartening and infuriating to see what garbage our college students are being indoctrinated with.  They are being told to ignore anything that smacks of conservativism or religious "superstitions and myths", while having the homosexual lifestyle and the "blame everybody but ourselves" attitude endlessly promoted.

When it comes to politics, I have my personal opinions, which are worth roughly the same as everyone else’s (since none of us are perfectly informed about everything).  However, this article about "what we lose because of Bush’s stem cell veto" got me at the spiritual, political, and human level.  It would have been enough that the article was an already tired retread of the "promises" (but no real results) of embryonic stem cell research, but the comments were pure, utter hatred toward anybody who disagrees with their "progressive" position of killing babies for their own benefit. 

At least with abortion, women are at least claiming (truthfully or otherwise) that it is a difficult decision to make, or that they were "forced" into it, due to their circumstances ("I’m still in school" or "My baby and I would have to live in poverty our entire lives").  With ESCR, though, nobody’s even pretending this is a difficult moral decision to make – instead, it is treated as "for me, for my benefit, for my family’s health" or even better, "for the technological future of our country."  God forbid our country fall behind in the dangerous, immoral technology sector.

To quote the article:

"The current policy is preventing cures from being developed, cures which our generation is the most likely to benefit from, because it will be several years before we begin to see clinical applications. Embryonic stem cells could be used to cure a wide variety of diseases including Alzheimer’s, Diabetes, and spinal cord injuries." (emphases mine)

So, basically it is progressive to support things that might help your generation.  What about the future generations?  What about the part of the U.S. Constitution that says:

We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity

It means we are supposed to do all things, not just for ourselves, but also for "our posterity" – the future generations.  If we are to ensure the blessings of liberty to future generations, that means that we have to respect their right to live as well as our own!

Unfortunately, as I said, the comments are full of hatred toward anyone and anything remotely conservative, including a commenter who said:

It just amazes me how these “pro life” zealots care more for a batch of cells in a petri dish than for all the innocents being killed in the middle east.
You’d think they’d be able to include stem cells in the category of collatoral damage.

"collateral damage"?  I don’t think he even knows the definition?  Collateral means "not direct" or "unintended".  When embryonic stem cells are harvested, a human embryo – a human life – is purposely, deliberately, and directly destroyed.  Unfortunately, this is a sample of the focus on most college campuses these days.  They are not focused on defining things (because definitions are truths), but on clouding the issues, making everything "in shades of gray", and mocking any traditional, religious, or moral opinions as "medieval" or "archaic" and "out of touch with reality".  Colleges without a strong base in faith are fortresses of the "science above all" kind of thinking.  They are taught that science and utilitarianism trumps any and all personal concerns.  They treat the human being as a means to an end, rather than as an end in and of themselves.

"Daughters of Jerusalem, do not weep for me; weep instead for yourselves and for your children, for indeed, the days are coming when people will say, ‘Blessed are the barren, the wombs that never bore and the breasts that never nursed.’ … for if these things are done when the wood is green what will happen when it is dry?"  Luke 23:28-31

Please do more than the average college student, and educate yourself about the issue.  Read a little more about how there are many more advances made with adult stem cells, and many, many more failures from embryonic stem cells.  Here’s one post from Jimmy Akin’s blog and here’s another from the American Life League that shows the great advances of ethical stem cell research.

And if somebody really wants to be progressive, how about not flushing our tax dollars down the drain, and instead using those research dollars to further proven, and ethically correct, techniques for curing diseases.  Wasting tax dollars and doing the wrong thing is the tradition of governments worldwide – be progressive by doing what’s right and what is not wasteful of money, lives, or any other resources (e.g., the brainpower of our scientific researchers).


This entry was posted in News and politics. Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to “Progressive” response to veto of stem cell bill

  1. Unknown says:

    "Unfortunately, as I said, the comments are full of hatred toward anyone and anything remotely conservative"I could say the same about your hostility towards anything remotely liberal. I also find your blanket statement about the technology sector being dangerous and immoral.Religious and other good-moral-type web sites, podcasts, eBooks, mailing lists, the list goes on and on. Like anything else, technology can be used for good or evil.Joe

  2. Unknown says:

    Allow me to correct the context of my "blanket statement" about technology.
    The line I wrote is: "God forbid our country fall behind in the dangerous, immoral technology sector."
    What I mean by that is "technologies that are dangerous or immoral", not that all technology IS dangerous or immoral.  I work in the technology sector, and I know that there are good and bad uses of tech.  What I am saying is that there are definite immoral techs (is there a good, active use for a nuclear bomb?  so far, the only good I have seen is the passive deterrant/threat of mutually assured destruction), and embryonic stem cell research that destroys a fetus/embryo is one such immoral technology.
    So, my line, although evidently worded poorly, was not a blanket condemnation of all technology – just those that have no moral basis behind them.
    As for my supposed hatred of all things liberal, please see my post at http://spaces.msn.com/jamiebeu/blog/cns!6E0753BD56367285!277.entry about how Catholics are neither Democrat nor Republican.  (I think this post also demonstrates that belief: http://spaces.msn.com/jamiebeu/blog/cns!6E0753BD56367285!192.entry )
    BTW, thank you for visiting my blog.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s