January 12, 2007

THE DON CORYELL OF A WOODY HAYES PARTY:

Bush's Historic Veto: He held the line against a Brave New World. (Charles Krauthammer, National Review)

Congress will soon vote to erase Bush's line. But future generations may nonetheless thank Bush for standing athwart history, if only for a few years. It gave technology enough time to catch up and rescue us from the moral dilemmas of embryonic destruction. It has just been demonstrated that stem cells with enormous potential can be harvested from amniotic fluid.

This is a revolutionary finding. Amniotic fluid surrounds the baby in the womb during pregnancy. It is routinely drawn out by needle in amniocentesis. The procedure carries little risk and is done for legitimate medical purposes that have nothing to do with stem cells. If it nonetheless yields a harvest of stem cells, we have just stumbled upon an endless supply.

And not just endless, but uncontroversial. No embryos are destroyed. The cells are just floating there, as if waiting for science to discover them. [...]

If it is proved that these are the Goldilocks of stem cells, history will record the amniotic breakthrough as the turning point in the evolution of stem cell research from a narrow, difficult, delicate and morally dubious enterprise into an uncontroversial one with raw material produced unproblematically every day.

It will have turned out that Bush's unpopular policy held the line, however arbitrary and temporary, against the wanton trampling of the human embryo just long enough for a morally neutral alternative to emerge.

And it did force the country to at least ponder the moral cost of turning one potential human being into replacement parts for another. Who will be holding the line next time, when another Faustus promises medical nirvana if he is permitted to transgress just one moral boundary?


Hitting on one deep ball after another...

Posted by Orrin Judd at January 12, 2007 9:05 AM
Comments

The vote in the House was way short of veto override. Another easy win for the President.

Other than social security reform*, what has the President ever lost? Even on social security, he started the ball going on its eventual change.


(*and Harriet Miers but it looks more and more like that was intentional, that the White House did that to avoid actually having a woman replace O'Connor)

Posted by: Bob at January 12, 2007 12:44 PM
« POOR MARTY: | Main | IT'D BE BETTER IF IT WERE BROTHER MALCOM WE WERE CELEBRATING: »