Stem cells: Give us the cures, spare us the sermon

Newark (red)Star Ledger ^ | 12/22/02 | JOHN MCLAUGHLIN

[Incorrigible]

Stem cells: Give us the cures, spare us the sermon

Sunday, December 22, 2002

[Newark, NJ] -- Paul Byrne has been a political operative in Jersey City for 25 years. He is one of those guys for whom politics is both vocation and avocation. He knows everybody in Democratic politics, and everybody knows him.

Nine years ago, Byrne was diagnosed with Type 2 diabetes, which has led to a retina condition called macular degeneration. At 57, and despite two operations on both eyes, he has lost 98 percent of his sight. But he keeps up with the news because four or five friends call and read him the newspapers.

Among the stories that came to him this way was a piece about a breakthrough in stem cell research in India that has led to the successful restoration of damaged retinas.

It left him furious. It is a fury directed at President George W. Bush, who is an opponent of embryonic stem cell research because the technique results in the destruction of embryos. Accordingly, Bush has ordered that federal funding be denied for this kind of research. And never mind that the embryos at issue are those left over from in-vitro procedures at pregnancy clinics and would be destroyed in any event.

So, freeze in perpetuity superfluous embryos created in a lab to induce birth, and you are doing the Lord's work. Destroy embryos after their stem cells are extracted in an attempt to cure people suffering from a dozen different diseases, and you are in league with Satan. Insert a recipient's DNA into a stem cell to reduce chances the body will reject it and you are paving the way for human cloning.

Last week the state Senate passed a bill that would make New Jersey the second state in the nation to legalize embryonic stem cell research. (NJ Senate Votes to Harvest Babies for body parts (My Title))  The bill is sponsored by Richard Codey, the Democratic leader in the Senate. It passed in a party-line vote with most Republicans abstaining. It passed over the objections of the Roman Catholic Church and various anti-abortion allies. The Codey legislation may be altered a tad but Gov. James E. McGreevey is a supporter and it is going to become law.

Not surprisingly, Paul Byrne is an enthusiastic supporter of the Codey bill. It may help him see again. He believes it's good science and good politics in a state chockablock in pharmaceutical research firms.

Of the opponents, he says, "They are the very people who believed in miracles, yet they would deny me my miracle." And they are hard at work.

Joan Quigley is a Democratic assemblywoman from Hudson County. She is being flooded with form letters informing her that the Codey bill "is not part of God's plan."

"I tell them that it's more important that God help those to whom he's already given life," Quigley says.

For years now, I've been reading about the promise of stem cells as a cure for a bunch of diseases. Parkinson's disease as often as not heads up the list. This interests me because I've had Parkinson's disease for about six years now. I'm not complaining. If you have to get a heretofore incurable, degenerative disease, this one is not the worst. Still, it hasn't been much fun and it's nice to know there's a potential cure out there.

So I could do without President Bush playing politics with my future by buying into the religious right's contention that it knows what God is thinking and God believes the destruction of embryos in course of research isn't much different than killing babies.

As for the Catholic Church, if the bishops want to take the position they know the mind of God on the question of embryonic research, so be it. But they might want to think about confining their efforts to people who still put stock in what they have to say. Their moralizing rings a little hollow these days.

Let God and me handle this. If the bishops don't mind, I'd like the opportunity to be treated if and when the researchers come up with the right technique.

And I'm willing to take my chances that God won't make me out to be a mass murderer.

Not for commercial use.  For educational and discussion purposes only.

[Long Cut]

"Who's the judge here? You, who wants to forcefully take our tax dollars to fund your human experimentation? Or us, who want to give the issue some time to examine the ethical implications? "

I never said that ANY tax dollars should be used for this research...it seems that all that is needed from the government here is a legal Go-ahead.

I believe, for the most part, that tax dollars have but two uses: to defend the country and deliver the mail. And the latter ONLY if it can be done cheaper and less expensively than Fed Ex can.

Let's be honest, shall we? Your side doesn't want "time" to examine anything. You would simply ban any research with which YOU have philosophical or religious issues. Asking for "time to study it" is a stall.

To all, it has been a great intellectual exercise debating you all! I hope no hard feelings were engendered; and if they were, that was not my intent. I am admittedly not convinced of your side, and you not of mine, but I WILL think on it. I only ask of you the same, ere you cast an irrevocable vot on the matter. Good night, all, and a Merry Christmas!

[Johnny Shear]

But you only assume this. You're wrong. This is what is 'unproven.'

I beg your pardon...Not proven wrong. I'm assuming there is some kind of opportunity otherwise we wouldn't be doing the research. Those who try to state we can do the same things with plecenta embroyos are assuming as well. And from what I've seen, the embroyonic cells are the most promising.

I'll side with research until we DO know the answer.

[MHGinTN]

Those who try to state we can do the same things with plecenta embroyos are assuming as well. Johnny, you're in over your head when you post such nonsense.

The issue is whether stem cells can be gathered from cord blood and placentas as opposed to the extraction of stem cells from embryos. It is very telling that the scientists wishing to go directly into experimentation on individual human life are purposely by-passing the usual non-human higher mammal research to prove the processes before experimenting with humans. The use of embryonic stem cells to try and cure Parkinsons has killed more than one adult in whom the stem cells were injected, forming tumors (or teratomas, if you wish) in the adult brain.

[MHGinTN]

Sorry, Lady, I do not. It would appear the 'cut' has left the building, so it wouldn't be of much use tonight anyway.

[Johnny Shear]

Johnny, you're in over your head when you post such nonsense.

Excuse me for not using the proper termanology, All-Knowing Dr. Stem Cell.

I'll post anything I please.

[MHGinTN]

Why thank you, JS! I do hope you will continue to post in the same manner. You aid in the debates by example. I was trying to refer to the fact that so many American citizens are very illiterate regarding embryonic individual life and the alternatives to exploiting that life ... and you have helped immensely. Thank you.

[MHGinTN]

Thought you might find this interesting ...

[Arthur McGowan]

Calling people who disagree with you names (like "namecaller") doesn't prove that you are right or that they are wrong. Merely asserting that it is "unconscionable" to object to the killing of innocent people for the benefit of other people doesn't make it so.

You have offered no objective, rational argument to show why it is morally acceptable intentionally to kill certain innocent people in order to do medical research.

[Z in Oregon]

Stem cells are not the cure all that they are claimed to bee. In clinical trials, a lot of things have gone wrong. People are looking for a charm bracelet, a fountain of youth. Wherever those things exist, dissecting embyonic human babies isn't it.

Adult stem cells exist and can be toyed around with ad infinitum sans moral dilemmas.

[Arthur McGowan]

Note that people who cite immemorial moral principles--like "Thous Shalt Not Murder," which are the basis of our civilization--are ridiculed as though they were claiming to cite personal revelations and visions from God.

[Z in Oregon]

Dr Mengele, white courtesy phone.

Exactly.

[VOA]

Nine years ago, Byrne was diagnosed with Type 2 diabetes, which has led to
a retina condition called macular degeneration

Well, I guess you learn something every day here at freerepublic.
I thought diabetic retinopathy was the beasty that took the eyesight of some diabetics...
and that macular degeneration was a vision loss that occured throughout the
population...
(and suppossedly can be alleviated/stopped with vitamin supplementation in some folks).
(at least a prominent eye doctor in San Antonio told me he thought the vitamin regimen
could help...and not hurt anyone with macular degeneration)

[Arthur McGowan]

These embroyos are not alive, they are not in a woman's uterus.

As to the statement that they are not alive: I challenge you to find a single physician or professor of biology in the world who will agree to forfeit his career as a biologist or physician if your statement is true. This statement is pure wishful thinking on your part. It is a pro-abortion superstition.

So they are not in a woman's uterus? So what? Is it okay to murder people because they live in Harlem rather than Westchester? Is it okay to murder people because they live in Italy rather than Monaco?

[Arthur McGowan]

Note that opponents of these murders cite well-established, publicly-debatable, rationally-defensible moral principles, while John McLaughlin cites his PERSONAL, PRIVATE, NON-RATIONAL intuition about what God thinks.

[MHGinTN]

Bttt

[snowstorm12]

It's sad when pro lifers continously use terms like dead babies and murdered innocents. Are these people really concerned with innocent life? If they were they would use their energies helping real children and end lifelong suffering and daily misery among hundreds of thousands of innocents that actually exist. That isn't their real agenda though. Imagine all the money given to the pro life movement which is a million dollar a year industry. All that money better spent given to real suffering children. A case that proves that religous brainwashing moves people away from making rational decisions.

In court you have to prove with undeniable facts not religious philosophy or theory. The pro life argument doesn't even come close to facts.

Maybe the next wave will be a movement to save unborn sperm and egg. Hey they are human life too so why discriminate!

Also using terms like murdered babies trivializes the worth of real babies who are living breathing suffering or really murdered and makes them equal to that of a braindead group of cells in the early process of dividing. They aren't equal and anybody who says they're has more than a few screws loose. They don't really believe that their own living children is equal to embryos or fetuses. They don't really believe that when a real child is murdered and when a fetus is aborted it's the same thing. If they do, it's sad and I really feel sorry for them.

[nina0113]

What's really interesting about ESCR, and I just thought of this the other day, is, WHERE THE HELL ARE THE ANIMAL TRIALS?

Since when is any medical research performed on humans without animal trials first? What animal embryos have been destroyed to extract stem cells from, to cure animal diseases?

[nina0113]

To summarize, if they are 1. never to be implanted in a living woman; and 2. never to be birthed by any living woman; and 3. lack the capacity for such birth in any case, then they are not now, nor will they ever be, nor do they even have the POTENTIAL to be human.

Check out http://www.snowflakes.org/ for embryo adoption - even the tiniest babies are wanted by someone. These embryos were and are human from the moment of conception.

From the Capuchin ossuary in Rome, where the skeletons of thousands of monks rest,let me remind you of their words:

"As you are now, so once were we;
As we are now, so will you be.

You too were once a single-celled human.

[MHGinTN]

You are sadly under informed: In court you have to prove with undeniable facts not religious philosophy or theory. The pro life argument doesn't even come close to facts. Facts?... How about scientific proof, proof that would determine the outcome of any murder trial, with DNA evidence? From the moment sperm and egg are conjoined, a new and unique individual human life is in existence. That individual human life will go through many stages in its lifetime or several decades ... decades, if it is lucky enough to be given life support.

You appear to line up on the side of withholding life support if it would inconvenience you. Compare a lifetime of decades to a few months of life support inconvenience. You hint that your sense of right and wrong is dictated by a court, by judges, by the majority rule. In America of december 24, 2002, a female can hire a serial killer to off the individual human being receiving life support from her body, life support that is extended voluntarily in 99.9% of pregnancies. Abortion is like a casual 'do over' to far too many under-informed Americans: a couple wanted pleasure but when their pleasure conceived a new individual human life; they decided they didn't want to continue life support --for whatever reason weighed against a lifetime about to be snuffed out-- so they cancel that individual's right to life. And the court now supports that hiring of a serial killer because of a SCOTUS decision that has come to allow cancellation right up to the weeks of anticipated birth, by killing methods so heinous that they wouldn't be allowed were a criminal being executed! And science proves these individual human lives being so easily snuffed out are unique individual human beings within moments of sperm and egg conjoined.

Maybe the next wave will be a movement to save unborn sperm and egg. Hey they are human life too so why discriminate! This shows your shallow understanding of biology, and a snide impulse to trivialize that which you don't understand. Science shows an all together unambiguous belief that there is a universe of difference in cells of an organ and an organism of organs made up of cells. That you haven't grasped such truth ought cause you to pause before posting such nonsense equating human gametes to the whole human organism.

Even you were once an embryo in during your lifetime, and your embryonic stage of life found you whole and complete as an individual human life at your normal state of existence. And so you have remained throughout however many years you've been alive since your conception and your journey begun in your human body ... a body that has developed and will continue to develop, from zygote, to blastocyst, to embryo, to fetus, to neonate, to crib-bound infant, to toddler, to pre-pubescent, to adolescent, to ... well, you get the gist.

[JMJ333]

Adult stem cells exist and can be toyed around with ad infinitum sans moral dilemmas.

A well known fact to those of us rabid pro-lifers, who have spent years following this atrocity. Frankly, there is a group of people who like playing god with human embryos. That is what scientific materialism is about. Cloning, human-pig chimera's, harvesting humans like a crop of corn for their cells....it all reminds me of Lord Of the Rings...or Nietsche and his superhuman.

How sad for us that the majority doesn't cares to understand the implications of what we are allowing under the guise of "technology," and that instead of championing life we are once again beating the drums of death.