Much has been said and written these last few decades about the so-called “Freedom of Choice”. The trouble is that there seems to be little to no concern for what it is that is being chosen. These days stem cells are big news especially how embryonic stem cells are concerned. The political left is very worried and militant about the “right” for embryonic stem cell research to be conducted. All we need do is look back to the last election to how much effort was put into this in different state referenda. People with handicaps (most notably Michael J. Fox) were paraded out in a style reminiscent of the cerebral palsy and muscular dystrophy telethons to gain sympathy for the measures with the false hope that if only embryonic stem cell research is allowed – and heavily subsidized by public money I might add – that these poor victims will walk again.
The truth of the matter is that little to no gain can be measured from the study of embryonic stem cells but adult stem cells have shown much promise. So then why all the focus on the embryonics? Because if embryos can be protected from destruction for medical research then what effect will this have upon the “right to abortion”? If we as a society accept that destroying fetuses just to harvest parts for medical research, then how long will it be before we are taking a second hard look at the Roe vs. Wade decision?
So if we clamor for the right to choose then we must also visit the logical and moral extension that we must necessarily explore the ramifications of what it is we are choosing. And given the state and extent of the developments in science (of all fields) then it is paramount that we take a long look at what the outcomes of such advances might be and at what expense are we willing to pay for the culmination of these technologies?