Life Abundant
The controversy surrounding life -- what it is, when it begins, and whether humans should tamper with -- it is a painful one, and not one likely to disappear soon. I believe in life, but I also believe in quality of life.
For that reason, I am glad President Obama, as a person of faith, lifted the ban on stem cell research. I believe that God wants people to have the best quality of life they possibly can.
If using stem cells from embryos that were not going to be viable anyway will help find cures for diseases that rob too many people of quality of life, then I am for it.
I am not in favor of arbitrarily killing embryos, or using embryos from aborted fetuses for research.
My being in favor of stem cell research has everything to do with quality of life, and I as a person of faith, I believe that God has allowed humans the capacity to even think of, discover, if you will, the ways to counter diseases that rob persons of good life quality.
It's the same capacity that allowed Louis Pasteur to figure out how to pasteurize milk, or Jonas Salk to figure out how to make a vaccine for polio. It's the same capacity that allowed researchers to discover that a heart valve from a pig can be safely used in a human being. Former First Lady Barbara Bush is alive because of that discovery.
Those who are against stem cell research argue that to use embryonic cells is wrong because an embryo is a full person already, with a soul.
I have no idea when the development of one's soul begins. How much of the soul's development in the embryo is contingent upon the nutrients the mother is able to provide so that the embryo moves from embryo to fetus ...to fully formed human being? I do not know.
What I do know is that we, as people have faith, do have souls. Our souls, supposedly fed by God, ought to be concerned with quality of life. As people of faith, we ought not be content to let suffering continue if there is something that can be done that might alleviate it.
For me, that's being concerned with quality of life.
One writer, in discussing this issue, said that the argument is one of ethics. When is it ethically OK to use stem cells? Some say never. I disagree.
There are too many people living lives of quiet desperation, people with multiple sclerosis, AMS, the Lou Gehrig disease, Parkinson's disease. Cancer. Alzheimer's disease.
If there is something that scientists can discover to make the diseases go away, then they should do it. There should be those monitoring their work so that unethical people do not resort to unethical methods to do their research - i.e., killing viable embryos. That is not right.
But if stem cell research can improve the quality of life for people who are hanging onto life, their souls in anguish because their bodies are ravaged by disease and pain, then, for the sake of the anguished souls of the afflicted and those who care for the afflicted, could there be anything that wrong with doing something to better the situation?
I think not.
I am grateful for the president's decision
By
Susan K. Smith
|
March 10, 2009; 12:12 AM ET
Share This:
Technorati
| Del.icio.us | Digg | Facebook
Previous: Stem Cell Research vs. Idolatry |
Next: Why Destroy Life? We Have Better Alternatives
Posted by: Paganplace | March 18, 2009 1:47 PM
Report Offensive Comment
I think it's better to go about our business
as if there were no gods and just do what
seems to be the humane and sensible thing to do.
Maybe there is no God, so why keep checking
to make sure we are behaving in ways that He would approve of?
If there's anybody up there He could say something
or do something to keep us on the right track.
The fact that He never does -
tells me that in all likelyhood there's nobody up there;
just the infinite cosmos.
Posted by: colinnicholas | March 18, 2009 10:58 AM
Report Offensive Comment
I completely agree. The issue of when an embryo begins to have a soul and exist as more than just cells is a complicated one, one that does not have a simple answer. But as Pastor Smith stated, the issue that should not be complicated to anyone who claims to be a man or woman of faith is the issue of improving the quality of life. Would the people of faith who protest against stem cell research agree that God would be content with His people suffering when there are scientific methods that may be able to find cures? I hope not. I would hope that they believe that God is never okay with human suffering when it is unnecessary or in the face of a cure. I do not agree by any means with using viable embryos for research, but for embryos that are not viable and would be disposed of, I see no harm. In fact I see a world of good. I think the important point to note is that these embryos are NOT viable, so no matter when you believe human life begins, these embryos will never have the chance to develop, so why not use them for good? For all those people living lives with horrible diseases, stem cell research may be able to increase the quality of life. These people include our mothers, daughters, senators, lawyers, teachers, philosophers, and future presidents! I applaud president Obama for lifting the restrictions on the research and I hope that this opens a plethora of possibilities in the world of medicine.
Posted by: spellady08 | March 16, 2009 8:20 PM
Report Offensive Comment
What ban on stem cell research...? There has never been a ban on stem cell research. There was only a ban on government funding, which is not the same thing. You have always been free to donate to research if you REALLY believed so strongly about it. I'm betting that not many here did so....
BTW, much of the world has been researching stem cells, so what is everyone so freaked out about...? Do you think that medical advances only work if they originate in the USA...? and if so, what kind of screwy thinking is that?
And do you really think that medical breakthroughs are some sort of contest between nations? Who the heck cares who figures out the cure to disease!
Posted by: carolm62 | March 15, 2009 5:12 PM
Report Offensive Comment
My sister has been living with Multiple Sclerosis for over 30 years. She has now seen her body deteriorate to the point that she needs someone to pick her up out of bed in the morning, put her in the tub to bathe her, feed her, put her on the toilet to relieve herself of waste and then pick her up to put her back in the bed at night -- every day of the year!
If stem cell research could have found a cure for MS or a treatment to help people living with MS have a better quality of life then I too applaud the President's decision and wish it had been done 20 to 30 years ago for my sister's sake. It would have given her a much better quality of life than the quality she has today.
One of the ministers of our church just buried his wife of 34 years. She died of Multiple Myeloma. Stem Cell research -- if it had been allowed 10,15,20 or more years ago -- might have found a cure for Multiple Myeloma and we would not have had to bury her last month before she reached the age of 55!
I agree with you, Pastor Smith, and I too applaud our president
Posted by: Jamila1 | March 14, 2009 11:28 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Like you, I am in favor of stem cell research. Besides, the same people who decry this type of research are most often the same people who decry services to poor people. Don't these people have the same "right to life" as the embryos they hold reverence for?
Posted by: djw531 | March 13, 2009 8:39 AM
Report Offensive Comment
I agree Pastor Smith, the quality of life is so very important.
I will not try to enter the debate of when life begins.
However, when I read your column it made me think about Nadya Suleman who just gave birth to octuplets. She spoke of the embryos, as “her babies” and that she did not want to destroy “her babies”. She took the stance that embryos have souls and are babies from the time of fertilization.
So my question is this, where are all the people that believe President Obama’s stance is unethical and immoral? Why have they been silent about Ms. Suleman? Where is the long line of people stepping up to volunteer to help her now that these 8 babies are no longer embryos but children in need of care? Is it unethical and immoral to judge Ms. Suleman and leave her children without the support it will take to make sure these children, no matter your view of choice?
Unfortunately, the concern for these eight souls may have ended when they were no longer embryos.
Posted by: tyson41 | March 12, 2009 11:37 AM
Report Offensive Comment
The comments to this entry are closed.











"For that reason, I am glad President Obama, as a person of faith, lifted the ban on stem cell research."
Also remember he didn't *actually 'lift a ban on stem cell research.' * He lifted a ban on anyone getting *government funding* doing stem cell research.
Pure for-profit R&D could do whatever the Hel they wanted all along under Bush's ban, which only served, in the guise of 'Respecting life' to be a wedge issue, and just happen to give a free hand and no oversight unto thee holy Corporations.