Embryonic Stem Cell Research: A Proxy Battle in the Abortion War

On the cusp of President Obama's lifting of the ban on federal funding of embryonic stem cell research all the typical media outlets are currently pouring over the seemingly age old debate on the usage of embryonic stem cells for the purpose of research in developing cures to everything from spinal diseases to, as some have claimed, lost limbs. The inherent problem with the debate is that it never actually had to take place, because the accusation has been leveled that the party who is opposed to embryonic stem cell research is opposed to anything that involves the stem cell, or worse, that they simply want those suffering that could theoretically be cured to die - their way is the only way, the controversial research's defenders argue.

The problem? As bio-engineering pioneers such as Advanced Cell Technology in Alameda, California have pointed out, stem cells of equal or higher quality than embryonic stem cells can be harvested in a variety of ways, without the need to actually damage embryos. This has long of course fallen on silent ears, culminating in the purported imminent lifting of former President Bush's ban on, specifically, federal grant money being allotted to this particular method of stem cell research.

The argument being provided by those opposed to the use of embryos is a relatively hard one to refute: we don't need to be turning potential life into our own organ farms to perpetuate our own health. The curing of the ill is a truly noble goal and no one I have ever encountered bemoans this intention, but we as a people, it is believed, should not benefit ourselves at the expense of either the unborn or future generations - however the fact that current government disagrees with this basic concept is abundantly clear in upwards of $3 trillion in spending before President Obama's first hundred days is spent, thereby imposing a crippling tax burden on the future in the meager hopes that we'll have a more comfortable today.

So in all it shouldn't be surprising that this mindset is coming back around to Washington in light of the Democrat near conquest of Congress and the taking of the White House. Or at least, that would be what it appears on the surface, but in the debate with Michael J. Fox's heart breaking condition being used as a contemptible smoke screen by opportunistic Democrats, it becomes all too patently obvious that the seemingly unshakable focus on abandoning any other form of equally beneficial treatments in favor of one that destroys potential human life comes as little more than a proxy battle in the debate on abortion.

Stem cell research is eminently more defensible than abortion on many notes, and while it's one thing to attack your opponents for not wanting to end a baby's life, it's an entirely different thing when you distort your position to be one of seeming pro-life, because after all, if you don't support embryonic stem cell research, you want Michael J. Fox to die.

And why would you want something so cold and heartless?

The simple fact of the matter is, embryos are so highly prized by Democrats not because they produce some sort of super stem cell, as organizations such as Advanced Cell Technology has soundly disproven, but because it's a gradual acceptance of the dehumanization of the birthing process. It's not horribly difficult to disassociate the humanity of a fetus if you've already accepted that in the embryonic stage they are perfect storage facilities to heal what ills us.

Then abortion just seems that much more acceptable - if we can cut it up and use it for a miracle arm, why can't we in turn just let the mother switch it on and off? It's just that silly clump of cells we use to rebuild our bodies like machines anyway, right?

Perhaps just as reprehensible is that this goal is fueled by politicians who practice a brand of snake oil selling that takes out a loan on something as, or what should be, untouchable as desperate hope. Any person who suffers seemingly an ailment, no matter how catastrophic, from spinal injuries to failed hearts to blood clots to brain damage, no matter what vexes you, just one little embryo and you can have your life back exactly the way it was.

And quite frankly, the desperate hopes of the crippled shouldn't be currency to support one's war, be it proxy or not, on abortion. The politicians, who one would be keen to remember, are not scientists, and they consistently make promises not actually backed by scientific opinion, but what will perpetuate the fawning of those who may just, in their hour of need on the backs of broken promises, say, "Alright, let's sacrifice the embryo on the altar of politics and give me my legs back," something the politicians know will never happen.