A Promise Kept: Obama Restores Science To Its Rightful Place
For the last eight years, the right wing, authoritarian, Bushite administration placed science, not in service to humanity, but chained by a dictatorial, reactionary, theocratic ideology.
The first two articles focus on the importance of this return to logic, commitment to and respect for science, and the third is about the fallacies and illogic of those decrying embryonic stem cell research. All are brief and worth a read.
John Nichols' piece in The Nation: "President Obama got a lot of applause for declaring in his inaugural address that he would "restore science to its rightful place, and wield technology's wonders to raise health care's quality and lower its cost."
"That was uplifting rhetoric, worthy of embrace and encouragement.
"But the louder applause should come now, as the president follows through on his promise.
"Monday's decision by Obama to lift the Bush administration's restrictions on funding embryonic stem cell research represents the word turned to action. And important action it is.
"As Wisconsin Congresswoman Tammy Baldwin, who represents the campus where pioneering stem-cell research was done, said after the signing ceremony at the White House: "Today those people struggling with debilitating illness and injuries and their families saw a new ray of hope."
Matthew Rothschild at The Progressive wrote: "Obama invoked the famous and the unsung who fought so hard for embryonic stem cell research.
'As we restore our commitment to science, and resume funding for promising stem cell research, we owe a debt of gratitude to so many tireless advocates, some of whom are with us today, many of whom are not. Today, we honor all those whose names we don’t know, who organized, and raised awareness, and kept on fighting – even when it was too late for them, or for the people they love. And we honor those we know, who used their influence to help others and bring attention to this cause – people like Christopher and Dana Reeve, who we wish could be here to see this moment..'
"On Monday, Obama also signed a Presidential Memorandum ten ensure scientific integrity in government decision-making. His Administration, he said, will “base our public policies on the soundest science.” And he pledged to 'appoint scientific advisers based on their credentials and experience, not their politics or ideology.'
"In typical fashion, the Republican Party remained the heartless party of no.
"Boehner and McConnell care more about the frozen embryos that are going to be discarded than the real-live human beings who are needlessly suffering today.
"The Republican leaders are lost in the wilderness of their own barren ideology."
Marty Kaplan at Huffington Post wrote: "The when-life-begins argument is about logical consistency. Life is life, period, and no compromise, even for the most compassionate of reasons, is possible. How then do its adherents justify, say, killing people in self-defense, or in war? The answer is that those circumstances are sanctioned by the Bible, every word of which was divinely written. If that's fundamentally what you believe, then there's no slippery slope to be concerned about, because you never need to make exceptions to the rules, because all the rules come straight from the Creator.
"But the slippery slope argument is all about exceptions. It doesn't require believing that legal rules come from moral rules that in turn come from on high. Instead, it's about what you believe coming from down below, from our innards and our evolutionary forebears. Call it hardwiring, or call it psychology; it doesn't matter. What counts is a fundamentalism about human nature.
"What this case against stem cell research is saying is that people are basically animals, slaves to their appetites, incapable of restraining themselves, biologically unequipped to make complex rules, or draw fine distinctions, or debate exceptions, or enforce differences. If we make one exception, and permit a scientist to culture stem cells from discarded human blastocysts, then when that scientist wants to make cowumans and humabbits, society will be totally flummoxed, completely paralyzed, incapable of drawing a legal line and saying no.
"If this were actually true, then the message society sends when police don't stop everyone over the speed limit on the freeway is that it must also be okay to be a hit-and-run driver. You know, there's a slippery slope between not arresting someone for smoking a joint and letting drug cartels destroy our cities. If you can restrict the sale of semi-automatic rifles, then you can ban the right to bear arms. If a shoplifter gets off easy, what's to stop a Bernie Madoff from being allowed to walk? If you make hate speech a crime, then it won't be long before free speech is a crime."
Comments