The title of this blog post is not mine, but is stolen from an article by Steven Pinker as published in the National Review (May 28, 2008), to wit:
This spring, the President's Council on Bioethics released a 555-page report, titled Human Dignity and Bioethics. The Council, created in 2001 by George W. Bush, is a panel of scholars charged with advising the president and exploring policy issues related to the ethics of biomedical innovation, including drugs that would enhance cognition, genetic manipulation of animals or humans, therapies that could extend the lifespan, and embryonic stem cells and so-called "therapeutic cloning" that could furnish replacements for diseased tissue and organs. Advances like these, if translated into freely undertaken treatments, could make millions of people better off and no one worse off. So what's not to like? The advances do not raise the traditional concerns of bioethics, which focuses on potential harm and coercion of patients or research subjects. What, then, are the ethical concerns that call for a presidential council?
If you read the entire article linked above you will learn of this council's desire to define ethics in terms of religion; specifically, judeo-christian religion as literally defined in the bible. How repugnant!
For example: ...the volume finds room for seven essays that align their arguments with Judeo-Christian doctrine. We read passages that assume the divine authorship of the Bible, that accept the literal truth of the miracles narrated in Genesis (such as the notion that the biblical patriarchs lived up to 900 years), that claim that divine revelation is a source of truth, that argue for the existence of an immaterial soul separate from the physiology of the brain, and that assert that the Old Testament is the only grounds for morality (for example, the article by Kass claims that respect for human life is rooted in Genesis 9:6, in which God instructs the survivors of his Flood in the code of vendetta: "Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed, for in the image of God was man made").
Absurd! If people want to believe this nonsense individually then more power to them, but this shit should not be the basis on which our government forms its policies on bioethics... indeed, it should not be the basis for ANY government policies.
Reading further, it becomes evident that the author of the report in question, Leon Kass, is a lunatic. Go to the linked article by Pinker and search for "ice cream cone" and I think you'll agree.
Just another example of fundamentalist christianity run amuck.
Wednesday, May 21, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
8 comments:
great article! but now i'm a lil paranoid about the ice cream police. ;)
corey, I hear ya there. But he also seems offended by al-fresco dining in general, and the basic concepts of such things as sandwiches, pizza, and fried chicken. He seems horrified by anyone who eats without utensils, ripping off chunks of food like an animal. (chuckle) So it's not just the ice cream police, it's the finger food police.
Finger food, fuck, how about a big greasy saucy rack of pork ribs. Nothing makes a human look more like a carnivore than eating parts of a pig's ribcage!
On another aspect of this subject, I can see many good things coming from these new technologies, but I still am debating within myself whether I would be willing to give the government a window into my DNA.
One last thought, maybe this batch of essays was produced just to give our Fearless Fucker some bedtimes stories. Anything with actual scientific theory or intellectual thought wouldn't have done the trick so they ended up with this tripe.
On a somewhat, ok very off topic moment, I just flashed on how amusing it might be to have some ultra conservative christian type found themselves a little fringe community that tries to operate by ALL the biblical rules. See how long it takes any modern gummint to shut that down.
That sorta happened Bob (not exactly) down here in Texas with that polygamist sect where the government took their children away...
Most of the so called 'utopian' movements of the 19th century and a lot of the christian based cults of the 20th try to do that, but they always get to a point of picking and choosing those that appeal to them.
I don't think it'd be actually possible to live by ALL biblical laws and rules these days.
Fuck laws!
Hey! There's the Bawdy Scot I've come to enjoy, admire, and cuss with!
Post a Comment