But in recent years, when it comes to stem cell research, rather than furthering discovery, our government has forced what I believe is a false choice between sound science and moral values. In this case, I believe the two are not inconsistent. As a person of faith, I believe we are called to care for each other and work to ease human suffering. I believe we have been given the capacity and will to pursue this research – and the humanity and conscience to do so responsibly.It's funny how this "false choice" that was "forced" on the populace was simply a direction of federal funding and nothing else. As far as I know, groups supported by private funding were not forced into anything.
I can also promise that we will never undertake this research lightly. We will support it only when it is both scientifically worthy and responsibly conducted. We will develop strict guidelines, which we will rigorously enforce, because we cannot ever tolerate misuse or abuse. And we will ensure that our government never opens the door to the use of cloning for human reproduction. It is dangerous, profoundly wrong, and has no place in our society, or any society.Note the wording here, it is terribly important. "The use of cloning for human reproduction." Not the use of cloning at all, just for human reproduction. This means we will produce genetic copies of individuals, and this will be fine as long as we kill them right away. If we can make clones which are good enough for stem cells, we're just one implantation away from a born clone. If the Obama administration is truly opposed to reproductive cloning, they must clearly ban "therapeutic cloning".
This Order is an important step in advancing the cause of science in America. But let’s be clear: promoting science isn’t just about providing resources – it is also about protecting free and open inquiry. It is about letting scientists like those here today do their jobs, free from manipulation or coercion, and listening to what they tell us, even when it’s inconvenient – especially when it’s inconvenient. It is about ensuring that scientific data is never distorted or concealed to serve a political agenda – and that we make scientific decisions based on facts, not ideology.This paragraph is also a load of BS. As a scientist, I know that science hasn't seen almost any restrictions almost anywhere. The question at hand is which science gets funded by the government, not which is permitted. Funding decisions are always political. We fund certain sciences over others often only because they have better lobbies.
Also, let's be clear about scientific data being concealed or politicized. Embryonic stem cells have been researched and held up as the Holy Grail of all medical treatments. They have produced exactly zero successful treatments. Adult stem cells, however, have yielded hundreds of successful treatments. Where should funding go? It's true that we make scientific decisions based on facts, but we use other criteria for funding decisions, and at any rate, the facts support adult stem cells.
It goes on. You can see how vocabulary is reworked to make the last 8 years seen "anti-science" and then, essentially say we need to start cloning to kill, and with taxpayer dollars. In slavery times, people were bought and sold by other people as property, and now it is the government doing it, and killing to boot.
It makes me sick.