Stemming of the Stem Cell

For the first time in his presidency, Presidentthe cell and tissue level.
George W Bush made a historic veto last JulyIt sounds perfectly fine and enormously beneficial,
19th killing the hopes of further development inso what's the fuss all about? As I was
the stem cell technology. The terminated bill was(objectively I hope) told, the controversy is
aimed at lifting the ban on federal funding ofrooted from the fact that the most viable stem
embryonic stem cell research which Presidentcells are from the tissues of an embryo. Applied in
Bush himself imposed in 2001.human context, it is the human embryo-- the
The Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act wasbeginning of life, something we humans cannot
unanimously voted by both the Senate and thealter or infringe on (as social and moral constructs
House of Representatives, but both chambers felltaught us).
short of the needed two thirds vote that wouldAnd when morals and ethics are in the picture,
have overturned Bush's veto power. With anpolitics cannot be missing. Given the numerous
argument on grounds of social morals, the vetoanalyses, view points, and opposition coming from
from the president was somehow already beenorganized religions and groups, governments of
expected. Bush has always been vocal in his standcountries where stem cell research are existing
against embryonic stem cell research and theare placed in an extremely stressful tipping point.
technology that uses human embryos in trying toWith pragmatic, revolutionary promises colliding
develop miracle cures for terminal diseases.with instituted social beliefs and moral convictions,
With the veto, President Bush gained a widergovernments are at the mercy of mutually
support ground among the conservativeexclusive polars. A solid support base is what
Republicans and the many progressive religiouskeeps a government alive (and a president
and conservative advocacy groups.popular). If majority of the people are secular,
Disappointment and frustrations, on the otherhurting their beliefs won't do a government any
hand, escalated among the seculars and liberals.good. But what about the national interest in
The issue has been residing in the highest officesadvancement and progress? And so the debate
of the country but many common Americans areensues.
still unaware on what is the real deal about stemFar more issues arise from stem cell. Should
cell. The only message the government and otherfurther researches be pursued and developed into
concerned parties are sending to the social base istechnologies? Should currently accepted stem cell
the potential of stem cell to cure terminalprocedures be widened? Should we be contented
diseases. Not enough understanding on how stemwith adult stem cells or bank more on embryos?
cell can achieve this potential and its political, social,Should stem cell research and technology be
and religious underpinnings is being made availablefunded by the state? Where do we draw the line
to the large public which at the end of the day isbetween morals and practicality?
at the receiving end of any legislation.To constructively engage in the issue, I argue in
In a very lengthy conversation I had with a cousinfavor of the stem cell advocates. The religious
who teaches Biology, I came to understand thatopposition some sectors have is not something
stem cells are cells of the body that are at theirnew to be so alarmed about. They had the same
very early stage of development and are not yetstance about divorce, about euthanasia, and even
designed to perform very specific functions. Unlikeabout war. Yes, their opposition is a necessary
brain cells that cannot replace the functions of theelement given that we are (ideally) in democratic
heart cells, stem cells can be developed andsociety where multi perspective political stands
assigned to do whatever function. Thisare celebrated. However, their opposition should
characteristic is apparently what is seen bynot in any way be the turning point of the fate of
experts to be million-years missing link to solvingany attempt to advance human knowledge,
serious body and organ malfunctions.especially if they (the anti-stem cell groups) or
Scientists and researchers say that by focusingtheir loved ones can benefit from it. Issues like
on the yet unspecialized nature of stem cells,the fraud and embezzlement of South Korea's
specifying mechanisms can be done to turn theseHwang Woo-suk are valid and worth the scrutiny
stem cells into a particular kind of cell to be usedit deserves. But essentially, the incident is not in
to replace damaged tissues of an organ. Thisany way indicative of the follies of stem cell
premise promises stem cells to function as repairtechnology.
kits especially to diseases that are currently hardNo technology cannot alter life. All the technologies
to solve like heart diseases, diabetes, spinal chordwe have accepted and been using have altered
damages, Alzheimer's disease and Parkinson'sour lives in greater deals that we can recognize.
disease. On a scholastic note, stem cell technologyDealing the issue of stem cell with objectivity may
advocates argue that by exploring the manyjust weed out the hindrances there are in arriving
possibilities of stem cells, humanity will achieve aat a sound and equitable deal with the benefits of
greater understanding on how diseases develop instem cell.