>
Here's to science
The Right to Life organisation has found a new reason for its state of perpetual moral indignation. An article in the latest issue of the international science journal Nature Biotechnology reported that scientists at Melbourne's Monash University have become the first in the world to grow human nerve cells from embryonic stem cells.Embryonic stem cells are derived from the early embryo and have the potential to become any type of cell in the body. Until now, scientists have been unable to direct them to grow into specific types of cells.
The human nerve cells created by the scientists could be used to repair nerve tissue and eventually treat diseases such Alzheimer's and Parkinson's, as well as strokes.
You'd think that such a major step along the path to curing diseases and disabilities which cause enormous human suffering and destroy lives would be lauded by an organisation that purports to be pro-life. But no, such a rational conclusion is beyond the grasp of the Christian right.
Of
course, some modern science is not unethical. Hi-tech vehicles which
protect popes' lives and save their ailing legs are a blessing. And hi-tech
hospital equipment which saves premature babies is doing God's work.
So how do you know which science is good and which is sinful? It's easy: if it might in any way be connected to controlling, hindering or preventing procreation it is inherently bad. Thus, the fact that stem cells come from embryos makes whatever they are used for a sin â no matter how much the resulting knowledge might alleviate suffering and improve millions of people's quality of life.
Having a scientific approach to the natural and social world and believing in an all-knowing, all-powerful god are world-views which do not sit well together. Indeed, they are contradictory, which means that dogmatic Christians' pronouncements on good and bad science are inevitably going to be without scientific foundation, no matter how much pseudo-science is invoked to rationalise their ideological premises.
In the case of research using human stem cells, the Right to Life leaders did not attempt a pseudo-scientific justification for their opposition. It is bad science because it legitimises abortion, they declared.
The clear implication is that women will be encouraged to have abortions to keep the supply of stem cells flowing to the scientists.
No matter that the embryos used are discarded from in vitro fertilisation programs, and no matter that once the process is under way, new cells can be reproduced from the laboratory cells so there is no need for more embryos. The Right to Life grabbed the opportunity to manipulate people's lack of knowledge about a new area of scientific research to fuel its campaign against women's right to choose abortion.
The notion that women's decisions about whether or not to have an abortion are made on trivial, irrational or ill-considered grounds has always been pedalled by those who want the decision taken out of women's hands altogether. Women are selfish or irresponsible or immoral: the litany of reasons as to why God â and his representatives on Earth â know better than the woman concerned what's good for her is all too familiar.
The idea that women might have an abortion (or feel OK about deciding to have an abortion) because she thinks her embryo will be useful in scientific research is just the latest absurd lie in a string of lies designed to keep women in slavery to God and their ovaries.
Here's to modern science's potential to help liberate women â and all humanity â from ignorance, disease, suffering and perpetual childbearing!
BY LISA MACDONALD