« not funny | Main | don's dissent »

July 29, 2005

frist, do no harm

Frist (fr[i^]st), v. t. [OE. fristen, firsten, to lend, give respite, postpone, AS. firstan to give respite to; akin to first time, G. frist, Icel. frest delay.] To sell upon credit, as goods. [R.] --Crabb.

"I am pro-life," Mr. Frist says in his speech on Thursday, arguing that he can reconcile his support for the science with his own Christian faith. "I believe human life begins at conception...I also believe that embryonic stem cell research should be encouraged and supported." (NY Times)

When he was nominated as Senate Majority leader, Dr. Bill Frist was hailed, by virtue of his experience as a medical doctor, as a consumate expert who could lead the GOP through the contentious medical conundrums of the twenty-first century. But apparently the question of embryonic stem cell research requires not so much a leading doctor as a average logician.

Frist has departed from Bush's policy which allows federal funding only for pre-existing lines of embryonic stem cells. Frist wants to expand that policy to include the use of frozen, soon-to-be discarded embryos to create new lines of embryonic stem cells.

"An embryo is nascent human life," Mr. Frist says in his speech, adding: "This position is consistent with my faith. But, to me, it isn't just a matter of faith. It's a fact of science." But more than either of these, IVF and federal embryonic stem cell research is about money.

The ethics of IVF (in vitro fertilization) is based on expediency: it does help couples who are having trouble getting pregnant to have children. But it creates many more embryos than the couple will use, mainly because creating embryos one at a time would be prohibitively expensive. If you believe, as Frist claims he does, that human life begins at conception, then IVF involves the hideous equation of lives for money.

Once you accept the morality or at least the expediency of IVF's lives-for-money equation, Frist's frozen embryo exploitation scheme is a relatively small step, involving only piddly issues like privacy and the lack of "strong ethical and scientific oversight." To put it another way, as long as the parents are ok with it, and as long as the doctors and scientists give it the nod, it's ok to take an innocent human life. Frist, you give new play to the phrase "hypocritical oath."

Posted by joel at July 29, 2005 10:22 AM

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.chezjoel.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/340

Comments

Posted by: uncle jim at July 29, 2005 08:51 PM

Posted by: Don Singleton at July 30, 2005 09:24 AM

Posted by: Joel at July 30, 2005 04:53 PM

Post a comment