There's quite a lot to unpackage following the President's long-expected lifting of the ban on federal funding of embryonic stem cell research. You can read a little bit about it here –
The Catholic League for Religous and Civil Rights put out an excellent five paragraph Press Release and the heart of it is excerpted below the link –
Catholic League: For Religious and Civil Rights
“President Obama acknowledged that he supports ‘groundbreaking work to convert ordinary human cells into ones that resemble embryonic stem cells.’ So do we. What he doesn’t seem to realize is that the enormous progress that has already been made in this area largely undercuts his decision to fund embryonic stem cell research. After all, if the same, or similar, results can be obtained without endangering embryos, on what basis can their destruction be warranted?
“Obama seems to know that he is in dangerous territory, but fails to say why. For example, he insists that embryonic stem cell research demands ‘proper guidelines and strict oversight’ so that ‘the perils can be avoided.’ What perils is he talking about? If the killing of nascent human life isn’t an issue—which he apparently thinks it isn’t—then what are the perils associated with this research? It is starkly remindful of the position of pro-abortion advocates: they always say we should have fewer abortions, but never say why.
“Obama’s adamant rejection of human cloning is welcome. However, it is not enough to say that it would be a ‘dangerous, profoundly wrong’ thing to do. We need to know why. For example, what principle is operative? Science teaches, and the Catholic Church accepts, that human life begins at fertilization. That being the case, the Church reasons, we are morally compelled not to treat human life—beginning at conception and lasting until natural death—as if it were mere fodder for research. Obama, and others, are free to disagree, but they are morally obligated to state the principle upon which they draw their conclusions. He most certainly has not.
And here's a not-very-long but fairly comprehensive piece on responses from the Vatican and Catholic Bishops
Stem cell go-ahead puts Obama at odds with pope | International | Reuters
Cardinal Justin Rigali of Philadelphia, chairman of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops' committee on pro-life activities, called Obama's decision "a sad victory of politics over science and ethics."
"This action is morally wrong because it encourages the destruction of innocent human life, treating vulnerable human beings as mere products to be harvested," he added.
The Catholic Church, other religious groups and pro-life advocates oppose such research — which scientists hope can lead to cures for diseases such as Alzheimer's and Parkinson's — because it involves the destruction of embryos.
The Catholic Church supports adult stem cell research, which has made advances in recent years, because it does not involve the destruction of embryos.
An article in the Vatican newspaper L'Osservatore Romano on Tuesday said "a real democracy" should be founded on protection of human dignity in every phase of its existence.
Separately, Osservatore's editor-in-chief Gian Maria Vian told an Italian newspaper that Obama "cannot claim a monopoly on being the Good Samaritan" by saying he supports embryonic stem cell research in order to help alleviate human suffering.
"Does that mean those who oppose embryonic stem cell research want to prolong human suffering?" Vian said.
Right. guess I'm a bad guy for opposing dissecting embryos.
Of course there's all sorts of Catholic pseudo-intellectuals trying to play down the Church's opposition. If you hit the link above from Reuters, the end of the article has the former Editor of the Jesuit publication America talking nonsense about finding a "middle ground". Wonder what his "middle ground" would be over the death penalty? Or slavery?
Leave a Reply