Apparently, the lack of formatting isn't my problem, but the comments section, but here goes: So, I asked a question, probably more specifically than I should have, but a question just the same, and one I've been reflecting on since Sunday. I asked Chris, basically, if anything said here would cause him to contemplate his position, not necessarily to change it, but to contemplate it. Well, regardless of his answer, I have an answer, and it is "Yes, it would." But, this probably isn't going to go the direction Brad would want it to :)

So, Chris used the S.S. (slippery slope) statement and used that, in part, to discuss this issue of embryonic stem cell research. I've come to the conclusion, Chris and Brad, that we are about 3/4 down that slope already. Forgive me if I wax poetic a bit here, but since we had what I considered a GREAT conversation, I decided to broach protocol and invite you into my brain's inner workings.

And, to show my cards, as you know, I'm an adoptive parent 3 times over. So, I'm VERY willing to admit that this colors my world-view (or, maybe, my world-view was already colored to make this a potential outcome of my family situation). But, then, facing the grim reaper (something Chris has done) with that gnarled bony finger pointed your way also has a way of doing that, too, and I don't presume to know exactly what I'll say when that happens :)

Anyway... the story... Just because science CAN do a thing, it doesn't mean they SHOULD do a thing. Knowledge is, from my perspective, morality neutral. Knowledge of how the atom works, the bonds that hold it together, what happens when you decide to take a chisel to those bonds etc. is morality neutral. What we do with this knowledge is not necessarily so.

I don't think anyone would argue that treating cancer with our knowledge of the atom is a bad thing (of course, for those religions that see this life as illusionary, they hold a contrary position to what cancer really is, so the use of the atom knowledge would be a bad thing in their estimation). We can also blow people and objects to smithereens with that knowledge. That causes some level of angst. These uses of the knowledge of the atom are not morality neutral.

So, my premise is that knowledge is basically morality neutral, but its application may not be so. Where's the slippery slope? To me, when people decided that they had a "right" to procreate when the natural processes failed them, we may have taken the first step over that line. I remember well certain philosophers started talking about in vitro fertilization and that we were entering a morality mine field (only, I didn't remember this until after much thinking on this issue). I now see part of this clearer than I did before.

As Brad so eloquently put it, "in for a penny, in for a pound." Well, maybe not those exact words, but he basically said, once he makes up his stubborn mind, he's not likely to change positions. My point here is that from a "stand" standpoint, those of us who are a’ gin’ embryonic stem cell research may be crying foul long after the real foul was committed. Kind of like cutting a chicken's head off... Oh, the chicken is dead all right, but that body that's running around hasn't figured it out yet.

The processes of in vitro fertilization created the fields ripe for harvest for the embryonic stem cell debate (Governments hate large sums of cash they aren't allowed to touch, and nature abhors a vacuum). But, we never really wrestled with the disposition of those unused, unneeded, held-in-stasis, and stuck-in-amber potential human beings. But for lack of a suitable environment (a woman's womb), there they remain.

Of course, when we do in vitro, we don't just drop one cell and see what happens. We drop several. What happens if the woman gets multiple hits? Then what? That quandary you find yourself in is a result of sliding down the slope a bit further.

This is why I am asserting, maybe not very eloquently, and certainly not very concisely, we're already in trouble on this issue.

Now, for those without a biblical moral compass (and I'm not passing judgment on those who do versus those who don't), your mileage may vary on this issue. If these cells are seen no differently from the cells in your processed waste system called a digestive tract, then it's a "no harm, no foul" deal when you "flush the toilet."

But, for those of us (and yeah, that includes me) who use the Bible as a frame of reference to view the world, what does it tell me? Well, the bad news is "Not much." The Bible is a book written from an adult perspective, and it's hardly a book on science (although where it touches on scientific things, it is accurate in it's description of them, such as where it says that things seen are composed of things not seen, which may be the first reference to a philosophical concept of the atom that there is... of course, they could be talking about someone's liver, too.). So, on issues of "when does life begin" we are left to draw a conclusion based on the scant little it does tell us, which basically says, "Life is valuable” and as my wife recently reminded me that God knew us when we were without form (another interesting and potentially scientific bit of clarity) in our mother’s womb.

Did the slippery slope start when the Protestants decided something other than abstinence was a good idea to control population growth or was it only when Monty Python coined the never forgettable song of "Every Sperm is Sacred" and we could no longer wallow in our own ignorance?

So, we are left to wrestle with these things, such as "When does life begin?" and "Why is there air?" because there is no clear treatise on the issue. And, the more I think about this, I think this is by design. When I stand before my maker, and He asks, "Why did you do X?" I hope I can cite something other than ignorance as my answer (because we all know ignorance of the law is no excuse).

My principle-based argument remains intact. Only where I stand now I find even scarier than I did, because I'm complaining about now wanting to be up to my waist in the mud in the bog, while I may be up to my knees in it already. That is, I'm already dirty.

Anyway, food for thought on a Tuesday afternoon while I try to avoid doing any real work...

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)

URL:
Remember me? YesNo

Comments: