I'm not familiar with the Wheeling Intelligencer or it's audience, but this support for Bush's seminal veto action is what I'd call typical for the course:
Feinstein’s newfound concern for the fate of “embryos” is almost touching, considering her otherwise nonchalant attitude toward the destruction of unborn children in abortions. Almost — until one seriously considers the hard fact that embryonic stem-cell research reduces tiny human beings to mere instrumentalities of “research.”-- Bush Right About Stem Cell Bill Veto
Of course, anyone who supports the a woman's right to choose is simply "nonchalant" about the destruction of children. I understand Dianne regularly feeds on the young of illegal immigrants, just to keep them in line. This is the constant stance of the uber-righteous ... if you aren't with us, you're clearly a sinner who loves death. As The Intelligencer writes later (that's right, this editorial isn't written by a person but by an actual periodical), there is no grey zone.
Problem is ... the "hard fact" is actually just an opinon. To cancer patients, stem-cell research reduces embyros to mere instumentalities of hope. Clearly, The Intellgencer hates cancer patients.
See, a solid irrational finger-pointing can work both ways.
This is not some mere “dilemma” or “problem” that politicians can or ought to solve. There is no real middle ground.
Advocates of stem cell research prefer to dodge the uncomfortable facts in favor of fuzzy, emotive promises of future cures for dreaded diseases. That is because they have a pretty good idea of how the issue would be settled if people objectively considered the notion of whether little human lives should be sacrificed in the name of science. To those familiar with the uglier aspects of 20th century history, the name Mengele unavoidably comes to mind.
Mengele operated on living humans to perform experiments which to this day would confound even the coldest mad scientist to determine any real scientific value.
Embryonic stem cell supporters want experiments performed on frozen embryos already harvested from willing patients that will only be discarded anyway in the hopes of curing things like cancer.
Anyone who has actually looked at the issue objectively and can honestly make any reasonable comparison between the two, feel free to speak up.
President Bush was right to hand down his first-ever veto on this issue. It is worthy of presidential intervention. Congressional GOP leaders, for their part, once again are showing their distant drift from the principles that got them elected. Indeed, in purely political terms, it is difficult to fathom why, with full knowledge that the president will unwrap his veto pen, congressional leaders would so boldly betray pro-life advocates who they desperately need to volunteer in electoral campaigns and to vote come November.
Instead of trying to curb the budget, Bush waited to use his veto to defy the public will of mainstream America and, just as The Intelligencer freely admits here, panders to the religious demographic. It's an abuse of Presidential power to further only one cause - votes for Republicans in November from the same people who are afraid of gay people and are probably right now hoping for The Rapture to occur.
I'll take "fuzzy, emotive promises of future cures for dreaded diseases" over that any day of the week, "Intelligencer".
tagged: politics, stem cell research