|
 've
nearly died waiting, but it can finally be said: The feminists were
right about one thing. Some portion of pro-life men would be pro-choice
if they were capable of getting pregnant. They are the ones who
think life begins at conception unless Grandma has Alzheimer's and
scientists allege that stem-cell research on human embryos might
possibly yield a cure.
It's either a life or it's not a life, and it's not much of an argument
to say the embryo is going to die anyway. What kind of principle
is that? Prisoners on death row are going to die anyway, the homeless
are going to die anyway, prisoners in Nazi death camps were going
to die anyway. Why not start disemboweling prisoners for these elusive
"cures"?
Meanwhile, every Republican with a doddering, 90-year-old parent
seems to be gung ho on experimenting on human embryos, or "blastocysts,"
as they are affectionately known to the "scientific community."
The ungreatest generation is so appalled at idea of having to take
care of mom and dad, now they're lashing out at embryos.
Admittedly, the real problem is with the creation of test-tube embryos
in the first place. But experimentation is just one more step in
desensitizing people to the idea of taking human life.
Stem-cell research on embryos is an even worse excuse for the slaughter
of life than abortion. No woman is even being spared an inconvenience
this time. We don't have to hear the ghastly arguments of mothers
against their own children, the travails of girls being sent away
to live with their aunt for a few months, or the stories of women
carrying the babies of rapists — as if that's happened more
than twice in the last century. This is just harvest and slaughter,
harvest and slaughter. Liberals warm to the idea of killing human
embryos.
The last great advance for human experimentation in this country
was the federal government's acquiescence to the scientific community's
demands for money to experiment on aborted fetuses. Denouncing the
"Christian right" for opposing the needs of science, Anthony Lewis
of the New York Times claimed the experiments were "crucial
to potential cures for Parkinson's disease."
Almost exactly a year later, the Times ran a front-page story
describing the results of those experiments on Parkinson's patients:
Not only was there no positive effect, but about 15 percent of the
patients had nightmarish side effects. The unfortunate patients
"writhe and twist, jerk their heads, fling their arms about." In
the words of one scientist: "They chew constantly, their fingers
go up and down, their wrists flex and distend." And the scientists
couldn't "turn it off."
So what great advance are we to expect from experimentation on human
embryos? They don't know. It's just a theory. But they definitely
need to start slaughtering the unborn. Why not have the government
give me a lot of money so I can sit around and think. Who knows
what I might come up with? I'm clever. It's possible. Give money
to Ann or condemn the world to disease and pestilence!
It is simply asserted that scientists need to experiment on human
embryos if they are ever going to find a cure for Alzheimer's, cancer,
AIDS, Parkinson's, and so on. Yeah, maybe. If so, then it's true,
but no one has demonstrated that it's true. Liberals are sobbing
and groaning that we don't know if SDI will work. We just shot a
missile out of the sky; what's their proof?
The Left is so transparent: Nobody ever heard of this incredibly
important research on human embryos until ten minutes ago. Yet everyone
makes believe he's known about the undiscovered bounty in human
embryos forever, and talks about it with real moral indignation.
This whole debate is a hoax designed to trick Americans into yielding
ground on human experimentation.
Incidentally, whatever happened to all the conjectural cures waiting
to be discovered in the rain forest? Somebody found a guava root
that tasted good in tea once, and that's the last the rain forest
has offered up. The pharmaceutical company Merck & Co. has been
combing the rain forest for a decade looking for some useful weed.
The results so far? Nothing.
Now it will take forever to chop it down. I have nothing against
the rain forest. But I'm confident that, someday, the "scientific
community" will decide that we face a choice of chopping it down
or risking never finding a cure for cancer.
|
