Slippery slopes

DallasBlog.com | Tara Ross:

“The President is one of the few federal officials who has not been taken in by the gross exaggerations of the pro-embryonic stem cell research lobby. Most congressmen have fallen, hook, line and sinker, for an emotionally appealing, if flawed, line of argument.”

Ed Cognoski responds:

Ms Ross herself grossly exaggerates the arguments in favor of embryonic stem-cell research in order to dismiss them. The argument in favor of this research does not rest on a guarantee that this, or any line of research, is a golden road to a cure for all sorts of disease. It doesn't depend on the claim that only embryonic stem-cells are useful research subjects. It doesn't depend on the claim that nothing can happen without federal funding.

But Ms Ross's exaggerations are all just padding for her real, non-negotiable argument. And that's that leftover embryos from fertilization treatments are morally equivalent to you and me and deserving of all the same legal protections we enjoy. She contends that federal funding should be denied even if the research is guaranteed to bring about cures to horrific diseases. That's not a scientific position. That's not a logical argument. It's an emotional argument that depends on the religious belief that a few cells in a petri dish are just like you and me, only littler. Peel away all of Ms Ross's side arguments about probabilities of success, cost-benefit analysis, slippery slopes, and you are left with a moving appeal to human emotion in an attempt to build a lobby for civil rights for cytoblasts.

Embryonic stem-cell research does not guarantee medical breakthroughs, but it is promising. To slam the door shut on promising research in order to accomodate one faction's religious taboos would be an injustice to society as a whole.