Thursday, July 20, 2006

What's the Big Deal?

So, Bush vetoed the embryonic stem cell bill. What's everyone so worked up about? It's just a piece of legislation that would have increased the size of government and OH MY GOD, I CAN'T BELIEVE HE VETOED THE STEM CELL BILL. It's possibly the most worthwhile piece of legislation that's passed through Congress in Bush's six years. It's true, I don't think the bill went nearly far enough—we really need therapeutic cloning to achieve the greatest promise of stem cells—but it would have allowed for much expanded research that could eventually create therapies and perhaps even cures for some of the most widespread and horrible diseases we face. Sure, those therapies are a ways away, which is exactly why we need to get cracking now. So by the time my parents are old enough to be at serious risk for a lot of these illnesses, and if not then, by the time my friends and I are, we will have some embryonic stem cell-related options.

I'm truly horrified by this veto. I'm horrified that the government won't fund research that could help and save so many people.

On to the self-centered part: Why am I so much more pissed off by this than I am by anti-abortion legislation? The basic reasoning is the same: A life is sacred as soon as it is conceived. I wholly disagree with that, but that's the argument, so why does it piss me off much more in one circumstance than in another? There are a few reasons I can pinpoint, some of which I'm OK with, and some of which I'm less proud of:

The Stakes are So Much Higher
According to the senators, therapies developed from embryonic stem cell research could help 100,000,000 Americans. That's a third of the country. I doubt that means now...I assume that means over the course of life. But in order to get those numbers for abortion, two-thirds of American women would get an abortion at some point in their lives. I don't know the exact stats, but I doubt the number is THAT high. Also, while not being able to get an abortion can ruin your life, hey, it's not Alzheimer's. Your ambitions could be shot, you can end up in the poorhouse, and you can be totally emotionally drained (I can't find the study, but research shows even people who want children are less happy after they've had kids. Seriously.) but you can control your limbs. You can remember who your parents are. You probably won't die. I'm cool with this reasoning...this isn't one I feel too guilty about.

Abortion's Currently Legal
So the threat doesn't seem THAT real. On the other hand, embryonic stem cell research really, really isn't happening. There's not a fight against it; there's a fight FOR it, and the burden's on us to save people. Great. This doesn't sound like reasoning I should feel bad about except for one thing: Abortion is illegal in South Dakota. In fact, embryonic stem cell research isn't illegal per se, it's just crappily funded. So there's really some parallel. And I just don't care that much about people in South Dakota, because I don't know them. I know that's not very good reasoning, but it's how I feel, because I'm only human. And on that note...

Madonna/Whore? Aren't We So Over That?
Why, yes, we are. But "if you have sex, what do you expect?" isn't the same thing as a Madonna/whore complex. OK, I should definitely back up a little: I believe—firmly, mentally, but perhaps not quite internally—that people deserve no less sympathy because they "brought something on themselves." I'm just as sad that you died because you stuck a fork in a socket as I am that you died because a stray bullet hit you. If you have a heart attack, I don't care whether you weigh 500 pounds or you run five miles every morning and eat naught but health food. I'm really sorry you had the heart attack. At least that's how I'd like to believe I feel. But there are some aspects of being human that suck—the need to divide the world into in-groups and out-groups is a biggie—and this impulse toward desert is one of them. Another study I can't find shows that people are much less likely to give charity to someone with an STD than they are to give charity to someone with a genetic disorder.

This is the reason I'm ashamed of. In the vast majority of cases, a person who got pregnant had some hand in that. On the one extreme, she very willingly slept with someone without any birth control while she was obviously ovulating. On the other extreme, she was raped. Most cases probably fall somewhere in the middle, with people being slightly negligent about their birth control...either not using it, possibly because they were drunk or misjudged timing, or being spotty with it or using condoms that were kept at the wrong temperature or moisture level or something. Should this matter that a woman had a hand in getting pregnant? No, it shouldn't at all. Once she has an unwanted pregnancy, she is a woman in need of a medical procedure. No questions about the past. But does this mitigate my anger relative to babies with type I diabetes, teenagers with MS, and 50-year-old with early onset Alzheimer's? Sadly, it kind of does. Ugh. I need to wash myself; I feel dirty.

The point is: This bill should have gone through. Blastocysts are not people. Not even close. And Sam Brownback insulted the intelligence of every member of the Senate. You go find the clip on YouTube. I can't bear to watch it again.

As a sidenote on the Madonna/whore complex thing. I've realized I actually kind of have one, but for men. Let's call it a Jesus/Solomon complex. I only deal in Jesi. And there aren't many of those. You know that. You've met men.

No comments: