Bush’s Stem Cell Research Veto And Questions On Moral Priorities

Last updated on: May 9, 2013 at 6:20 am by Faithful Democrats

Bush’s Stem Cell Research Veto And Questions On Moral Priorities 2013-05-09T06:20:51-06:00 Faithful Democrats

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

President Bush vetoed legislation Wednesday passed by both the House

and Senate that would have allowed federal funding for expanded
embryonic stem cell research. In his veto message, Mr. Bush said, âIf
this bill were to become law, American taxpayers for the first time in
our history would be compelled to fund the deliberate destruction of
human embryos. Crossing this line would be a grave mistake and would
needlessly encourage a conflict between science and ethics that can
only do damage to both and harm our Nation as a whole.â

His spokesman, Tony Snow, took the argument one step
further, stating, "The simple answer is he thinks murder’s wrong. The
president is not going to get on the slippery slope of taking something
living and making it dead for the purposes of scientific research."

But if embryonic stem cell research is tantamount to murder,
then one might think that any president who approves of such research
would be considered an accessory to the crime.

Thus it was ironic that in the same speech, Mr. Bush pointed
out that, âWhen I took office, there was no Federal funding for human
embryonic stem cell research.â As he had in his first presidential
debate with Senator John Kerry in September 2004, Mr. Bush then boasted
that he was the first president to approve funding for embryonic stem
cell research. âMy Administration has made available more than $90
million for research of these lines. This policy has allowed important
research to go forward and has allowed America to continue to lead the
world in embryonic stem cell research without encouraging the further
destruction of living human embryos,â he added. "The president is not
opposed to stem cell research, he’s all for it," Snow said earlier in
the day.

The sponsors of the legislation, Representatives Michael Castle
(R-Del) and Diana DeGette (D-Col), specifically restricted the funding
to research on stem cell lines derived from early embryos created by in
vitro fertilization clinics and otherwise destined for destruction.

The Catholic Church forbids in vitro fertilization under any
circumstances, a view not shared by about 70% of American Catholics in
several polls. A 1987 document issued by the Congregation for the
Doctrine of the Faith, called Donum Vitae, said that use of in vitro
fertilization creates a "dynamic of violence and domination." But Mr.
Bush and the Republican Platform have never called for the banning of
in vitro fertilization. The number of âembryo adoptionsâ in the US is
unknown, but it is a tiny fraction of the more than 400,000 early
embryos currently stored across the country. Most of these embryos will
never be implanted, and Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist has likened
stem cell research on these early embryos to cadaveric transplantation
of hearts to save the lives of people in heart failure.

An analysis of some numbers may provide a helpful perspective
on the debate. An estimated 440 million fertilization events occur
around the world every year, which works out to 1.2 million zygotes
created every day leading to about 350,000 babies born daily. Thus
60-70% of these early embryos are lost, most prior to implantation.
This is a daily early embryo death rate of roughly 844,000 per day
worldwide. (This compares with about 71,000 legal abortions daily
around the world, and 55,000 illegal abortions). On average, about 820
early embryos are implanted in women each day in the US for purposes of
assisted reproduction, and 710 of them are lost (with 109 live births
per day). The number of new stem cell lines being created every day
globally is thought to be fewer than one, with 22 lines currently
available for federally funded research under Mr. Bushâs 2001 plan, and
fewer than 200 available in private repositories after five years of
unfunded research.

No public discussion has taken place about how to save the 844,000 early embryos that die each day around the world.

No public advocacy by the Republican Party or by
religious leaders has been made for an investment of research dollars
in saving the embryos lost to ânatural causes.â If the early embryo has
the same moral worth as an adult human, then saving these lives would
seem to take on an immense moral urgency. By comparison, one-sixth as
many people–155,000âwill die today worldwide of all other causes.
46,500 will die from heart disease or stroke. 19,000 will die of cancer
today, one-third of the deaths preventable. 16,480 people will die
today of starvation. 6,800 children will die from diarrhea today. 100
people today will die violently in Iraq. One or fewer embryos will be
diverted today from storage or death to the creation of a new stem cell
line.

American taxpayers are being compelled to pay every day for the
killing in Iraq, most against their will, but Mr. Bush is not concerned
about their moral reservations on this issue.

As a moral community, we should decide if bringing an
additional 844,000 people into the world each day is a priority,
virtually tripling the number of children who would be born every day.
If these lives have the same moral value as any adult, as Mr. Snowâs
remarks suggest, then they should be saved as urgently as we seek to
keep our elderly from dying unnecessarily of stroke. But if saving
elderly people from ânatural causesâ when stroke attacks is in fact a
far greater priority for our society than saving the 844,000 embryos
dying of natural causes (as current research priorities would suggest),
then it might be worth investing our moral outrage more properly in
providing food to the hungry, clean water to the worldâs children, and
peace to the war-ravaged countries of Iraq, Lebanon and Israel than in
villainizing stem cell research scientists seeking cures for chronic
debilitating diseases.

Featured Writers

Previous Post

August 20, 2006

What Christian Democrats can learn from progressive Anglicans

Next Post

August 20, 2006 Whatâs Wrong with the Religious Right?

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category About Us About Us Action Center Advertise Ask a Theologian Ask a Theologian Blogs Books Campaign Blog Candidate Spotlights Commentary Donate Facebook Featured Writers Fellows Fellows From the Pulpit General Information Hillary Clinton Interfaith Blog Latest Media Center Media Center Media Center MyBlog MyBlog News Newsflash Newsflashes Our Team Reader Blogs RSS Sermon of the Week Shop Social Networking Static Items Support Talking Points Test blogs The Basics Theology Uncategorized YouTube

Select a Month November 2020 October 2020 February 2020 August 2019 July 2018 July 2017 March 2017 February 2017 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 June 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 January 2006 August 2004

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

How much was Judas paid to betray Jesus?

Select your answer to see how you score.

30 pieces of silver 20 pieces of silver 12 pieces of silver 10 pieces of silver