Stem Cell Research May No Longer Be a Moral Issue

[Jake]

Nancy Reagan and Ronald Reagan Jr. are very pro-stem cell research.

And disagreeing with a family member of someone means you hate that person?

[A18]

BTW, Laura Bush is pro-choice. I guess pro-life people hate Bush.

[Ebowed]

BTW, Laura Bush is pro-choice. I guess pro-life people hate Bush.

While we're on that subject, Bush used to be pro-choice, as did his father.

[angus]

this could finally take one hot-button issue off the table:

I disagree.  I think it's a non-moral issue only among academics and government researchers.  With scientific detachment, and sheer academic interest, you can discuss stem cell research.  This particular scientist may fancy himself diplomatic and politically wise, but when he tries to get funding, he immediately puts on his moralist's hat and talks about applications.  Watching Michael J. Fox discuss autism and the benefits of stem cell research to that cause results in a moral reaction among many, who will immediately support federal funding.  In fact, it is very much moralism that causes people to support most federal funding of medicine.  I understand that one's person's morality may not be the same as another's, and there is certainly a subset of the population for whom moralism actually pits them against federal funding of stem cell research, but it must be borne in mind that there is another huge subset (probably the larger of the two), for whom, if explained well, the prospect of federal funding any medical research elicits a moral reaction in favor of the research.  What I'm saying is that the "detached scientist" is the exception, not the rule.  And most folks will have some strong moral feeling about this issue that overrides the usual economic concerns, whether or not the word embryo or fetus even arises in the discussion.

Don't you think the desire to have cures for their various ailments is the reason people advocate government spending on health research?  Sounds pretty practical and self-interested to me, not 'moralism' at all.

I do not disagree that there would be other groups.  Not just moralists and those with acacemic interest.  But no I disagree with you that only those with an immediate interest will be those supporting.  In fact, it is moralism that leads to socialized medicine, the abolition of capital punishment, the abolition of slavery, the prohibition of alcohol, and the like.  This not a new and novel idea, and is taught in a number of schools.  It has become fashionable lately to equate "moralism" with "traditionalism"  This is simply misguided, and shows a lack of understanding or maturity.  I think we've lost sight of what moralism really is, which is why, in this case, it's necessary to offer some examples.  The images and voices of Christopher Reeve and Michael Fox and Stephen Hawking and others are specifically used to invoke a moral response.  To follow your logic, only those who are homosexual would support gay rights.  Only those who are nonwhite would support racial equality.  Only those who have ever been convicted of a crime would support criminal rights.  You may have difficulty with this concept, but most folks do have heartstrings capable of plucking.  Since you do not, I cannot expect you to fully appreciate Moralism.

[angus]

BTW, Laura Bush is pro-choice. I guess pro-life people hate Bush.

While we're on that subject, Bush used to be pro-choice, as did his father.

yeah, george bush did a 180 on just about everything to become Reagan's running mate.  Pretty much the same as lieberman when he became gore's running mate.  "Vouchers?  Did I say I was for vouchers?"  it's amazing what politics will do to ya.

[Ebowed]

BTW, Laura Bush is pro-choice. I guess pro-life people hate Bush.

While we're on that subject, Bush used to be pro-choice, as did his father.

yeah, george bush did a 180 on just about everything to become Reagan's running mate.  Pretty much the same as lieberman when he became gore's running mate.  "Vouchers?  Did I say I was for vouchers?"  it's amazing what politics will do to ya.

Really?  What else did Lieberman flip on?  I know he believes life begins at conception, but oddly he's pro-choice anyway.  Funny that as an Orthodox Jew he sticks to not campaigning on the Sabbath more than what his religion would define as murder and the sanctity of life. 

[angus]

many many things.  not that it matters to me.  I decided early on in 2000 that I couldn't support either main party ticket, and voted for a third party candidate that year.  although I did warm up to GWB later.  much later.

Here's a partial compendium:

http://www.nationalreview.com/geraghty/geraghty091003.asp