The Godless Left and their media stooges continue to ridicule pro-lifers for opposing stem cell research. We are routinely portrayed as cold-hearted knuckle-draggers who would deny medical treatment to Alzheimer’s ravished diabetics just to satisfy our own personal agendas.
Of course, the basis for this depiction is a lie. In reality, I have never met one pro-lifer who was opposed to stem cell research – even embryonic stem cell research. Let me say this one more time: the issue is not the research but where the stem cells come from and how they are obtained. Cell lines derived from umbilical cords, or placenta, or from babies who died in some natural manner such as miscarriage, stillbirth or accident do not create a moral problem. But we cross a line that should never be crossed when we use cell lines from babies who were intentionally killed by abortion. And we obliterate that line when we actually create human life for the stated purpose of destroying it and using it in medical experiments.
To appreciate that science unfettered by morality is the most evil and dangerous force on earth, imagine that a team of researchers has developed a drug that would cure cancer, heart disease and diabetes. This miracle drug is produced from a chemical found in healthy people between 15 and 55 years old and the amount needed to treat the entire country would require only about 500 donors per year. Additionally, clinical trials prove that the drug is 100% effective and perfectly safe.
The only downside is that harvesting this chemical always kills the donor. So the issue becomes, given that millions of people could be saved, should we create a national lottery to select 500 people a year to be killed to make the drug? Out of a population of millions, each individual’s chances of being selected are tiny and some would have died from accidents or illness anyway. Besides, a certain number of them would not have led productive lives.
So why not sacrifice a handful of these people every year in order to save millions from the horror of cancer, heart disease, diabetes, etc.? All we have to do is be willing to say that where the chemical comes from is irrelevant, which is precisely what some people are currently saying about embryonic stem cell research.
Don’t for a moment think that the hypothetical situation above is far-fetched. If we could go back 50 years and tell people what’s happening right now in the field of medical research and bio-technology, they would call that far-fetched. They would never believe that the things we see happening every day all around us would ever be tolerated in this country. And only a fool would think this is anything more than the tip of the iceberg.
Today, some people are trying to rationalize using aborted embryos in medical experiments by suggesting that it is a way to “make something good come from abortion.” They argue that these children are either already dead or that they are going to be discarded whether we exploit them or not. The moment we buy into that philosophy, we become absolutely no different than the Nazi thugs who stole the gold fillings from the teeth of Jews they killed in their concentration camps.
The point is, it is morally repugnant that we slaughter unborn children in the first place, and when we rob their graves to make our lives better we disgrace ourselves even further. So, if the question is whether we should “discard” these dead babies instead of using them in medical experiments designed to benefit us, the answer is an unqualified yes. We have no right to profit from our own evil.
Finally, let me make one thing perfectly clear. This myopic focus on embryonic stem cells is about finding a way to justify abortion. If that is not true, then you explain to me why all the hype is about embryonic stem cells when all the medical breakthroughs have come from adult stem cells.