Stem Cell Controversy, Seinfeld and Christian Hypocrisy
With President Obama signing a bill allowing taxpayer money to fund stem cell research, the debate is reborn (pun not necessarily intended) about when life begins. The far right party generally says that life begins at conception and that destroying a 5 day old blastocyst is murder. The far left says that it is definitely not a human yet, but opinions vary widely as to when it actually becomes one.
(I’ve always found it a strange double irony that the left fights so hard against capital punishment but is so easily swayed to kill embryos, or even 2nd or 3rd trimester fetuses; the right will fight to save the life of each and every embryo (even if they will be simply discarded into the trash after a few years) but once they are born, wants to offer them no assistance for living.)
Few doubt that research done on embryonic stem cells would certainly lead to some incredible medical breakthroughs, but at what expense?
I love Seinfeld. There is a character on the show named David Puddy who proclaims to be a Christian. One day Puddy woke up and looked outside his apartment door and saw his neighbor’s newspaper; he wanted to read it but he knows that stealing is a sin. So he called back into his apartment for Elaine and asked her to go get the paper for him to read. When she asked why he couldn’t get it himself – he indicated that he can’t because it’s against his beliefs to steal. The story continues from here but this is all I need for my illustration.
So – what am I getting at? I don’t know when God determines life begins. Maybe it’s at conception. Maybe it’s when the embryo attaches to the uterus. Maybe it’s when He “breathed in him the breath of life and man became a living soul” – I surely don’t know – but I know for sure (just like Puddy) that I don’t want to commit murder, so I don’t want to volunteer my approval for stem cell research.
Now let’s say that as a direct result of stem cell research, scientists are able to determine a cure for Alzheimer’s or Parkinson’s disease and someone I love needs the medicine or procedure that can cure them. Am I going to accept the cure? If I say “yes”, am I really any better than Puddy?
(I’ve always found it a strange double irony that the left fights so hard against capital punishment but is so easily swayed to kill embryos, or even 2nd or 3rd trimester fetuses; the right will fight to save the life of each and every embryo (even if they will be simply discarded into the trash after a few years) but once they are born, wants to offer them no assistance for living.)
Few doubt that research done on embryonic stem cells would certainly lead to some incredible medical breakthroughs, but at what expense?
I love Seinfeld. There is a character on the show named David Puddy who proclaims to be a Christian. One day Puddy woke up and looked outside his apartment door and saw his neighbor’s newspaper; he wanted to read it but he knows that stealing is a sin. So he called back into his apartment for Elaine and asked her to go get the paper for him to read. When she asked why he couldn’t get it himself – he indicated that he can’t because it’s against his beliefs to steal. The story continues from here but this is all I need for my illustration.
So – what am I getting at? I don’t know when God determines life begins. Maybe it’s at conception. Maybe it’s when the embryo attaches to the uterus. Maybe it’s when He “breathed in him the breath of life and man became a living soul” – I surely don’t know – but I know for sure (just like Puddy) that I don’t want to commit murder, so I don’t want to volunteer my approval for stem cell research.
Now let’s say that as a direct result of stem cell research, scientists are able to determine a cure for Alzheimer’s or Parkinson’s disease and someone I love needs the medicine or procedure that can cure them. Am I going to accept the cure? If I say “yes”, am I really any better than Puddy?
"the end doesn't justify the means" - George Costanza ;)
Of course you are going to accept the cure. I would say it fits in with God working all things out for good to those who love Him and are called according to his purposes. I would assume that you would still remain against the initial research.
I'm not sure whether to be against the research or not. Are you? BTW I like your answer about God working everything out for good. I still feel like it would be hypocritical though to "wish" to "read the paper" and hope someone else steals it so that I don't personally commit the sin.
Who knows what God would do for us if we really treated all life as sanctified. Let's not assume that stem cell research is the quickest and best way to cure Alzheimer’s. Surely God will reward our efforts to protect life, and surely he does not want us to secretly yearn for stem cell research.
I think this makes sense if we look at what everyone has said combined. Kevin - good point - why would toeing the line on murder be the best way to find a cure for disease? Maybe God would honor us with a cure if we/scientists prayed and asked for direction in their research. However, if the scientists do find a cure through this type of research, then as Jim said "all things work together for good" and we as Christians should be free to accept the cure, even if we wouldn't have condoned the research for it in the first place.
I am definately against research using embryonic stem cells in research. My knowledge that God creates life through man and women makes the issue of "when life actually starts" irrelevant. The fact is that God is the creator, end of story (in a good way)