In defense of the sanctimonious women's studies set || First feminist blog on the internet

Stem cell research vs. IVF

Jill

Many conservatives, like George W. Bush, are against embryonic stem cell research but support IVF, despite the fact that this is a completely inconsistent position. And, really, if stem cell research is equivalent to “dismembering” a human being, then why just stop at barring federal funding of such research? Why not push for an all-out ban on any stem cell research or fertility treatment that may result in discarding of embryos? Again, there’s a serious logic gap here.

Posted in Uncategorized

7 thoughts on Stem cell research vs. IVF

  2. “Why not push for an all-out ban on any stem cell research or fertility treatment that may result in discarding of embryos?”

    Because middle class people in the red states sometimes need fertility treatment and banning it would inconvenience them…which might lead to Bush or the Republicans losing support. No one really believes that an eight celled blastula is a person. If the fundies believed that, they would be lobbying for research into the cause of failed implantation, a problem which, if one accepts every conceptus as a person, is killing 50-70% of the population at age 2-3 days. Yet no one is lobbying for a federally funded program to cure this plague. Why not? Because they don’t really believe that the “babies” being killed are babies and a crash program to end failed implantation wouldn’t further their real agenda of controlling women–and men.

  3. G.W. is very inconsistent on his “right to life” position. Stem cell research and IVF is just one example. As Govener of Texas, he had the ability to stop the executions of prisoners sentenced to death but in fact while he was govener of Texas a record 152 people were executed. And since he has become President another 3 people were executed at the Federal level, starting federal executions for the first time in decades. I think if you support the “right to life” then you must also oppose the death penalty.

    Keep in mind that statistics show that most likely 9-12 of those 152 were innocent.

  4. “Keep in mind that statistics show that most likely 9-12 of those 152 were innocent. ”

    Making the assumption that the justice system in Texas is as good at determining guilt as the one in Illinois. Given all I’ve heard about the criminal justice system in Texas, I doubt that that is a good assumption. Most likely more than 9-12 were innocent.

  5. Now that they’re pushing the snowflakes (embryo adoption), they seem to feel there’s no inconsistency in their position. Of course, they compeltely ignore the fact that it is not like adoption of a living child and if a large amount of these implantations were to work, there are even higher risks to potential incest du to the seer volume of embryos produced (or maybe I’m worng, maybe they’re actually counting on a low implantation rate so they can calim a moral high ground with out having to actually take care of resultant children). I’d still like to know why these families would be willing to adopt the embryos with supposed desire to have as many live births from them when they don’t seem to be adopting the mulitude of special needs and minority children languishing in the system now.

  6. Because they don’t really believe that the “babies” being killed are babies and a crash program to end failed implantation wouldn’t further their real agenda of controlling women–and men.
    Actually I would tend to think it’s because they are ignorant of failed implantation. Most of these folks think that all birth control especialy that which causes failed implantation is evil because it is, in their eyes, abortion. It would follow that if they knew much about failed implantation they would probably raise a cry to fund stopping it. They would also probably say we should take money from AIDs research to do it.

  7. Treban:

    I don’t think they’re willing to admit that there is any failed implantation in any situation but one involving contraception (their understanding of it, not the actual facts). They don’t recognize that, in nature, we’re lucky to have a 40-60% implantation rate under the best of circumstances.

Comments are currently closed.