Should stem cell research be funded by government?

Conservative — Obama won’t condone ‘right’ way

Brian Cuaron

It is time for me and my fellow Republicans to come before the altar of the Democratic Party and admit our mistakes. So, with tears in my eyes and sorrow in my heart, I bow down in penitence as Bishop Obama preaches the need to hand out federal funding for embryonic stem cell research.

We were wrong in worrying about the potential lives that will be destroyed because of this research. We must care about the sick people of today and forget about the helpless children of tomorrow. Instead of worrying about ethics, like when life begins, we need to think about how we could cure that kid from “Back to the Future.” It’s actors like Michael J. Fox we need to care about — not some stupid clump of cells that could one day turn into the world’s next Martin Luther King, Jr.

Our Republican Party was wrong in letting ideologies about human life influence our decision to cut federal funding for research. Our principles of right and wrong shouldn’t guide millions of taxpayer dollars. It is the overall good of American society that should be the cornerstone of our policy. Never mind the fact that such self-indulgent thinking may lead to the oppression of others.

Here I am asking Brother Obama for the forgiveness of my party’s politics on this issue. He, the chosen one, has finally led me to the mountain of knowledge and light. Now I am able to see that I no longer need to be held to the chains of religious ideals about life and morality. Gone is the influence of teachings regarding the value of human life and murder — there is no place for those archaic philosophies in today’s technological era.

As a result, we now have a new way of thinking with which to live by — liberalism. Instead of wasting our time at religious meetings we can now tune in to Obama’s weekly online video messages at WhiteHouse.gov. This is the way it must be since liberalism does not allow for religious influence in government, especially regarding petty matters like the rights of the unborn.

In expectation of Obama’s approval of federal funding, we can hope to one day produce body organs from destroyed embryo cells. Yes, prosperity for the living at the expense of the dead. That’s what I call keeping in tune with our nation’s values. Obama sure kept his promise on that one.

Join me, my conservative brothers, as we embark upon a new era of societal thinking in which our conscious plays no role. Rather, we will live by creeds established by Democrats, their Hollywood counterparts and the all-knowing magnificent “One.”

Brian Cuaron is a junior English major and the video editor for the Daily Forty-Niner.

Liberal — Research would benefit everybody

Christopher Herrin

Under President Obama, a federal funding ban on stem-cell research is expected to be overturned. This action is long overdue, because the research is widely acknowledged as potentially able to yield profound results.

Scientists believe that research could make it possible to successfully treat conditions like Parkinson’s Disease and spinal cord injuries. This is because stem cells act like master cells and can grow into any of the body’s 200 different cells.

However, research has been controversial because the creation of a cell line requires destroying embryos. Opponents argue that it is infanticide and reduces the unborn to a research tool. For these reasons former President Bush forbade funding.

Proponents argue that ethical objections can be overcome by using embryos that would be destroyed anyway through in-vitro fertilization. In 2006, then Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, a Republican and former physician, said research should be funded when using cells donated by couples who have completed IVF treatment.

The potential for breakthroughs is too profound to pass up. The irony is that research would eventually save lives and restore quality of life to disabled people. What is more pro-life than that?

In January, a Menlo Park, Calif. company announced it won federal regulatory approval to begin human trials of treatment involving cells to repair spinal cord injuries. In animal trials paralyzed rats regained some movement.

Josephine Quintavalle, director of Comment on Reproductive Ethics, which opposes such therapies, dismissed the research as “highly speculative.”

“The work is at a highly experimental stage and there’s still a question mark over the capacity of these cells to form tumors,” she said. “What worries me is that patients will really believe this is going to cure their spinal injury … embryonic stem-cell treatments cannot ever be justified,” she explained.

All scientific research starts out as speculative and has the potential to get patients’ hopes up. Is that any reason not to pursue research? If we required an up-front guarantee that all medical research later yield a profound breakthrough, then no research could ever be started.

This research is far too important to be held hostage by religious fanatics and political opportunists.

For those who oppose this research on moral grounds, I offer this challenge: If you ever need treatment that was developed through the use of stem cells, you can opt not to use it. Probably not many woulc take me up.

Christopher Herrin is a graduate Religious Studies major and a columnist for the Daily Forty-Niner.