In case you haven’t heard the news, there is a new approach to creating stem cells for research, one that does not involve human cloning or the destruction of human embryos. First Things’ Joseph Bottum had this to say about the development:

If the news of major breakthroughs in cell research should turn out to be correct, we are about to witness something like victory in the fight over embryonic stem cells.

And that will open a nest of interesting questions, beginning with this one: All those editorialists and columnists who have, over the past ten years, howled and howled about Luddites and religious fanatics thwarting science and frustrating medicine—were they really interested in technology and health, or were they just using all that as a handy stick with which to whack their political opponents?

You may remember back in the last election I opposed Missouri Amendment 2 because it authorized human cloning and destroyed embryos. Supporters even put Michael J. Fox on television, declaring that embryonic stem cells were the only hope to cure his Parkinson’s disease. But as the First Things article above suggests, support for embryonic stem cell research was not pro-science, it was pro-abortion.

With 2,000,000+ votes cast in 2006, Missouri Amendment 2 passed by less than 50,000 votes. With new science under our belts, perhaps now is a good time to begin efforts to repeal it.

Related posts:

1. The Inner Life of a Cell Anyone who is interested in biology or chemistry has...
2. Atheism considered harmful Dinesh D'Souza has an article in the Christian Science Monitor...
3. Talent concedes in Missouri, still hope for killing Amendment 2 Well, it's 1:30am, and I'm going to bed. Talent just...

This entry was posted on Tuesday, November 20th, 2007 at 2:09 pm. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.