The Worthwhile Company, Inc.
Does your growing business need an IT dept.?
The Worthwhile Company can help!
Software Applications - Network Support - More!
Visit our Advertisers!
HOME | Contact Editor | Add Comment | Forum | Directory | Search | Advertise | Tell-a-Friend
October 25, 2006 | South Carolina Headlines


Join us in
South Carolina Headlines

Sign up today to take part in the forums, interact with the content, receive South Carolina Headlines newsletters, display current weather conditions in your area, and more.

Already a member?



Support South Carolina Headlines - visit our advertisers


Author (last 7 days)


 :: Jonathan Pait
 :: Benj Buck

 :: Jimmy Moore
Press Releases

 :: List All

Want to be a columnist? Contact the editor to learn how.

Embryonic Research: Sacrificing not saving
Benj Buck
July 15, 2005

A house catches on fire, and you have a choice — save a toddler or save fifty embryos.  Progressive thinkers, like Andy Arnold, use such hypothetical persuasion to support their desire for embryonic research.


This emotionally-charged scenario asks us to choose between a toddler or embryos, when in fact, the debate calls for no such choice.  Actually, the ethical dilemma is not even one of saving lives.  The debate over embryonic research is not about saving, but sacrificing lives.  The researchers would form a theory, take hundreds of embryos to test and retest his theory, and have no guarantee for any success.  In reality, lives are being sacrificed for the betterment of others.


Rather than giving an emotionally charged hypothetical scenario, let’s use an analogy from history.  In the 1930s and 40s, Nazi doctors experimented on life they viewed as lesser.  Whether trying to test for natural immunities against tuberculosis or treatment for war time nerve gases, the Nazis were not afraid to sacrifice one life for the health of another.  This sacrifice was done in the name of advancing “the superior race.”  Unfortunately, while most Americans condemn Nazi ethics, many embrace the betterment for some, no matter the sacrifice.


Embryonic research does not ask which life to save, but whether or not to sacrifice.


Post a comment for this column

You must be logged in to participate. You may use the MyVoice! area at the top of this page to log in, or you may set up a new account.


Use the partisanometer to put this columnist in his place - liberal or conservative? Just click left or right. First, you'll need to sign on.

Join in the fun! Sign on and give your rating on the partisanometer.


Join in the fun! Sign on and give this article a thumbs down or a thumbs up.


Refer Column

Refer this column to a friend. Highlight the fields below, fill them out and press "Send."



Send your comment to the author of this column.


Embryos are collateral damage. Republicans have proven they care nothing about collateral damage, even when there is no guarantee of success. If you folks treated living-breathing life, inside and outside our borders, the same as you propose to treat a collection of human cells inside the womb, then perhaps you would have some credibility. . . .

Read the rest.

Site Stuff

Sessions: 814783
Members: 829

  South Carolina Headlines
Made possible by The Worthwhile Company, Inc.