Last week the Australian Senate passed an amended Bill which could potentially allow for embryonic stem cell research. It has now passed onto the Lower House for discussion.
The problem I have with this Bill is that stem cell research involves cloning and killing embryos. And embryos are humans. And they are people made in the image of God.
Whatever you think about Bush, one thing I admire about him was that he fought for banning abortion, keeping the definition of marriage as between male and female, and banning stem cell research. And according to the SMH, stem cell research using discarded embryos is high on the Democratic agenda (a real issue now that they have a majority in the US Congress).
The problem is that this issue is highly emotive. Like the woman today who angrily said to me after church, 'I hope you're not going to make me sign that petition!' (We invited people to sign a petition that would be send to our Federal MPs against the cloning Bill). She seemed to be in favour of scientific advancement over killing embryos. Or maybe she didn't understand the consequences of stem cell research. I hope it was the latter. I don't know, she was too angry to discuss it.
But there are other arguments other than scientific advancement that are put forward in favour of embryonic stem cell research. People argue (rightly) that the embryo has no developed nervous system so it can't feel pain. But since when did a painless death justify murder? People argue that all kinds of diseases have the potential to be cured using stem cells. But since when does killing humans in order to save humans become right? People argue as well (I'm rusty on the scientific process involved in this) that cloning doesn't have to involve a sperm cell, so it is not really a human that is being created. But if the clone that is created has the potential to be a human, then you are still killing someone who was made in the image of God.
It will be a sad sad day when murder in the laboratory in the name of science is legalised. Pray it doesn't happen. And take action by writing to your local Federal MP.
2 comments:
Great post . . . on so many levels! "Faith versus science." My biggest frustration with the embrionic stem cell research argument is that they can use nonembrionic stem cells for the same research. I can't help but think that this is part of a liberal agenda to find value in aborted pregnancies and terminated life.
What a great topic for you . . . faithfulscienceman (how's the thesis coming?) . . . that could be your superhero name!
There are a huge amount of questions that are raised when people start to talk about stem cell research as well as whether it is ethical to kill another just so that you may live.....
It really is a massive can of worms...
When does a mass of cells become a human?
Can you justify wars at all - it involves the killing of others to protect a way of life?
Are birthcontrol measures killing embryo's? (certain ones take effect after fertilisation)
As far as embryonic vs nonembrionic cells go there is a difference. I am rusty here but essentially I think that it is that non embryonic are already "differentiated" whereas embryonic are "non differentiated" meaning that they are able to a lot more things with the embryonic ones. Not saying it justifies it just pointing out there are differences.
Anyway my two cents - I actually just dropped by to wave and say hi Misty (long time no see) but then saw this thing and couldn't resist stirring the pot....
Post a Comment