The Definition of Life?
I find it of interest that while Bishop Sheridan (see my post on May 15) expressed where Catholics should stand on issues regarding abortion, euthanasia, and gay marriage, nothing was mentioned about stem cell research. One would imagine that an issue such as gay marriage will fade in front of a topic of a much grander scheme such as life/embryos. Personally I'd think this is more of a cut and dry case than that of the abovementioned issues. But what do I know, I am not a Catholic. Does that mean this issues merely slipped the mind of Bishop Sheridan, or that he has yet to determine which way to manipulate the Catholic voters? Perhaps he personally knows someone who's suffering from one of the diseases that stem cell research shed lights on curing? I wonder if that makes him a "cafeteria Bishop."
I refer to the article "Stem-Cell Rebel" by Margot Roosevelt published in Times magazine in the May 17, 2004 issue.
Last month 206 U.S. Representatives wrote to the President, calling on him to fund stem-cell research on spare embryos from a pool of some 400,000 stored in the freezers of in vitro fertilization clinics. These embryos, only a few days old and smaller than the head of a pin, will probably be discarded unless they are donated to science. Embryonic stem cells, the letter noted, can be used to treat "diseases that affect more than 100 million Americans, such as cancer, heart disease, diabetes, Parkinson's, Alzheimer's, multiple sclerosis, spinal cord injury ..." The signatories included two dozen pro-life Republicans.
"Pro-life Republicans"--yet another interesting term to learn. Let me understand this: abortion is wrong but fertility clinic creating extra embryos to be discarded later OR to use the excess embryos for stem cell research are acceptable. Hmmmm. I am not even going to quote George Orwell anymore--it is simply getting old too fast.
Granted, the definition of "when life begin" which we have been debating for decades can be tricky. When I was younger, some 10-13 years ago, it was a cut and dry case for me--I am pro-choice. Mind you, to date I still am pro-choice. Same reason I support euthanasia, the quality of life comes before life itself. It's not worth giving birth to a kid when he/she is not going to get the kind of love and care that he/she needs or that the quality of life of all those around him/her degrades significantly--parent(s) who are not financially or emotionally ready to have a child. On the side, I do not agree to use abortion as a form of birth control.
I've never bothered myself with "when life began." I assumed it's somewhere in the grey area of when the embryo resemble a baby. For the most part, I left that discussion of when the soul enters the embryo/fetus to Catholics. My very simple view point changed owing to my last job--a tissue recovery personel who goes around to hospitals, morgues, or Coroners' Office procuring tissues from cadaver donors for transplant purposes. Sometimes our job requires us to follow organ teams. (Organ teams procure the ORGANS which tissue recovery, well, procure the tisses. And I shall not go into more graphic description here as I have been told some might find that disturbing. Many of you may not know that -- I certainly didn't before I started the job -- organ procure can only be performed on heart-beating, brain-dead patients.) My very first case following an organ team was when I learned that the patient was first pronounced as "brain-dead," the organ team cross-clamp the patient prior to the procurement, causing, I guess you can say, the physiological death of the patient. I was stunted. I couldn't shake the feeling that the organ team was the ones who "killed" the patient for the rest of the night. And that's what prompted me to re-think the issue of when life began. If I consider a brain-dead patient still alive, then I should consider the same of a fertilized egg, regardless of its days of existence.
Personally I find stem-cell research more disturbing. Creating embryos just for the purpose of destroying them? At least with aborption we are dealing embryos/fetuses created unintentionhally. I got an idea, how about using aborpted fetuses for stem-cell research? That's like two birds with one stone. Regardless, my pro-choice stance still stand. But "pro-choice Republican"? How exactly do they draw the line? Pick one side of the fence will you? I wonder if it makes them "cafeteria Republicans" when the pick and choose what they support.
I refer to the article "Stem-Cell Rebel" by Margot Roosevelt published in Times magazine in the May 17, 2004 issue.
Last month 206 U.S. Representatives wrote to the President, calling on him to fund stem-cell research on spare embryos from a pool of some 400,000 stored in the freezers of in vitro fertilization clinics. These embryos, only a few days old and smaller than the head of a pin, will probably be discarded unless they are donated to science. Embryonic stem cells, the letter noted, can be used to treat "diseases that affect more than 100 million Americans, such as cancer, heart disease, diabetes, Parkinson's, Alzheimer's, multiple sclerosis, spinal cord injury ..." The signatories included two dozen pro-life Republicans.
"Pro-life Republicans"--yet another interesting term to learn. Let me understand this: abortion is wrong but fertility clinic creating extra embryos to be discarded later OR to use the excess embryos for stem cell research are acceptable. Hmmmm. I am not even going to quote George Orwell anymore--it is simply getting old too fast.
Granted, the definition of "when life begin" which we have been debating for decades can be tricky. When I was younger, some 10-13 years ago, it was a cut and dry case for me--I am pro-choice. Mind you, to date I still am pro-choice. Same reason I support euthanasia, the quality of life comes before life itself. It's not worth giving birth to a kid when he/she is not going to get the kind of love and care that he/she needs or that the quality of life of all those around him/her degrades significantly--parent(s) who are not financially or emotionally ready to have a child. On the side, I do not agree to use abortion as a form of birth control.
I've never bothered myself with "when life began." I assumed it's somewhere in the grey area of when the embryo resemble a baby. For the most part, I left that discussion of when the soul enters the embryo/fetus to Catholics. My very simple view point changed owing to my last job--a tissue recovery personel who goes around to hospitals, morgues, or Coroners' Office procuring tissues from cadaver donors for transplant purposes. Sometimes our job requires us to follow organ teams. (Organ teams procure the ORGANS which tissue recovery, well, procure the tisses. And I shall not go into more graphic description here as I have been told some might find that disturbing. Many of you may not know that -- I certainly didn't before I started the job -- organ procure can only be performed on heart-beating, brain-dead patients.) My very first case following an organ team was when I learned that the patient was first pronounced as "brain-dead," the organ team cross-clamp the patient prior to the procurement, causing, I guess you can say, the physiological death of the patient. I was stunted. I couldn't shake the feeling that the organ team was the ones who "killed" the patient for the rest of the night. And that's what prompted me to re-think the issue of when life began. If I consider a brain-dead patient still alive, then I should consider the same of a fertilized egg, regardless of its days of existence.
Personally I find stem-cell research more disturbing. Creating embryos just for the purpose of destroying them? At least with aborption we are dealing embryos/fetuses created unintentionhally. I got an idea, how about using aborpted fetuses for stem-cell research? That's like two birds with one stone. Regardless, my pro-choice stance still stand. But "pro-choice Republican"? How exactly do they draw the line? Pick one side of the fence will you? I wonder if it makes them "cafeteria Republicans" when the pick and choose what they support.
posted by cahalan @ 20:42
|
<< Home