The Amorality Of Science Has Won

FreeRepublic ^ | 5/27/2003 | Marvin Galloway

[MHGinTN]

For years, essays opposing cloning and embryonic stem cell exploitation have been posted from this writer onto various discussion sites across the Internet. This will likely be the last of such efforts, for Science has won; the amorality of scientists has vanquished yours truly. The fundamental axiom that embryological human life is not the life of an individual human being has become so ingrained that to continue opposing the notion only furthers the goals of the scientists seeking unfettered exploitation of nascent life. From the scientists’ lofty positions, their carefully crafted derision for opposition to their flawed axiom passes for proof of their axiom.

The authoritative science outlet, Scientific American, now routinely publishes articles with the assumed axiom that the human embryo is not an individual human being, thus the embryo is fair game for all manner of exploitation, approved under the guise of application of science for the advancement of medical miracles.

In the June 2003 issue, on page 63, the article ‘Pandora’s Baby’ assumes as foundational truth the notion that embryos are not individual human lives, thus the conception of such, the storage of such, the implantation of such, and the discarding of such is enlightened application of science … and the implied proof of this axiom is the acceptance of in vitro fertilization (IVF), world-wide, numbering now more than an estimated one million individuals conceived and born via such technology since the first individual, Louise Brown, came into the air-world, 25 years ago.

Editorial staff of Scientific American magazine saw nothing untoward in passing the axiom along as foundation for their article, an article posing the notion that therapeutic cloning will likely be as accepted a few years from now as IVF is since Louise Brown’s birth. The author of the article cites the desire of scientists to keep separate the perception of reproductive cloning and therapeutic cloning … or, as the author so craftily restated it, research cloning instead of therapeutic cloning. After citing this desire to keep separate methodologies that have the exact same first steps of cloning embryos in vitro, the author offers the notion that such a paradoxical assertion should be authoritative, thus lending substance to the purposed obfuscation (if not outright chosen lie; all cloning of embryos is reproductive, with only the end goal for the cloned individual life to define a specious difference).

This arbitrary positioning of ‘non-moral foundational principles’ regarding the earliest age of individual human beings may not seem of any great significance to the average reader at Scientific American, or of any merit to scientific minds convinced that their pursuits are beyond the realm of ethics and morality, as objective studies of life’s reality. But to this struggling writer, the assumption that embryo is not the earliest age along the lifetime continuum of an individual human being is an horrific plateau deep down along the slippery funneled slope of dehumanization for our species, in preparation for our acceptance of cannibalizing younger human beings to serve the lives of older human beings. It’s been a helluva war.

Author of the article in the June issue cites with derision the nay Sayers when IVF first began, decades ago. The derision is founded on the notion that alarmists based their arguments against the manipulation of embryonic life on ‘silly notion that exploiting embryos would lead to horrific things’. Well, if this writer is correct, and embryos are in fact individual human beings in their earliest age along their individual lifetimes, then what the magazine author is praising with ‘research cloning’ is in fact the warned of horrific potential, verified! What nay Sayers warned of, is where we have actually arrived with research cloning.

The magazine author doesn’t make a clear connection of past arguments, instead, she obscures the warnings from that past age by citing weaker versions of the underlying warning to enhance her derisive power … kind of like ridiculing the wheels on a funny looking car as a way to discredit the whole car.

Because the lies of those in support of abortion on demand (and that is the camp to which this female author belongs, as alluded to in sentences that denigrated objection to IVF as connected to the ‘failed anti-abortion movement’) have become so ingrained with so powerful publishers as Scientific American, this writer has come to realize the war is lost, come to realize that nay Sayers will not be granted venue in which to state objection … no matter how well written are essays countering this exploitation of individual human life, the controlling authorities cannot allowed them to be published, for the foundational axiom posited is contrary to the one the prestigious magazine has adopted as ultimate truth in their ‘amoral’ reality.

What impact will my bowing out of the war have upon the ultimate outcome? Likely, none; the war is already lost at the legislative level, with no less powerful figures to crush opposition than Senators Orrin Hatch, Arlon Specter, Barbara Boxer and Tom Harkin, assisted of course by the ‘amoral’ networks in search of empowerment for their media. These powerful forces have decided, for whatever constituency’s advantage, to push for therapeutic cloning protected by Federal law. Embryos don’t vote, and the folks donating embryos and the gametes to conceive future embryonic life don’t object to exploitation of nascent individual human life, so the powerful who are able to silence nay Sayers by ignoring them have already won the war.

Cannibalism is now an agreed upon fact for America’s future, as enlightened application of medical ‘miracles’. I suppose I should be relieved, I can now exit the battle and return to what amuses me; I’m already 57, so I won’t be around to witness further degradation of the human species; my granddaughter will live in an ‘age of cannibalism’. I shudder for her and the world she will inhabit, but then I realize, those cannibalizing human beings in their embryo age won’t tell the truth of what they’re doing, so life will go on, and on, and on, and … well, maybe. What is the longest reigning species for planet Earth?

Now, back to what I do for the fun of it … fiction.

[MHGinTN]

Next to last paragraph, 'in tiro' = in vitro

[Remedy]

If you can remember a time when you weren't alive, you're very unusual. I don't remember any such time. Ergo, I have always been alive.

Since PhD means "Doctor of Philosophy", I am a bona fide philosopher and can say such things with authority concerning:

Astral Projection

Reincarnation

Channeling

astrology

mysticism

palmistry

Divination

Levitation

extraterrestrials

I didn't know the Psychic Friends network granted mail order Phds'.

[cpforlife.org]

"I didn't know the Psychic Friends network granted mail order Phds'."

In the voice of Ed McMahon: hey-oohhh. Dat wuz good!!

Just watching from the sidelines.

Score:
Remedy & MHG 10
Dr. exDemMom & Dr. Moreau (silent partner back on the isle) ZERO

[MHGinTN]

^

[exDemMom]

I didn't know the Psychic Friends network granted mail order Phds'

Well, see, I looked into that option but they actually wanted me to write a check and pay them for the certificate.

What really made me decide to go the University of California route instead is that, even though it was more work in the long run, they paid me to get the PhD. I mean, if I've got to suffer through all that schooling, I might as well get something out of it, shouldn't I?