So Easy A Neocon Could Do It

The fate of the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act of 2007 (SCREA) may be decided this week. It was passed in the House of Representatives on Thursday, June 7, by a margin of 247 to 176, and includes the following three ethical restrictions handily illustrated below by Karen Wehrstein:

1. The stem cells were derived from human embryos that have been donated from in vitro fertilization clinics, were created for the purposes of fertility treatment, and were in excess of the clinical need of the individuals seeking such treatment.

2. Prior to the consideration of embryo donation and through consultation with the individuals seeking fertility treatment, it was determined that the embryos would never be implanted in a woman and would otherwise be discarded.

3. The individuals seeking fertility treatment donated the embryos with written informed consent and without receiving any financial or other inducements to make the donation.

Researchers at Boston’s Whitehead Institute announced they were able to produce stem cells from the skin cells of adult mice which behave almost like embryonic stem cells. Such a breakthrough might someday negate the need to produce practical treatments for every human affliction under the sun from discarded human blastocysts. If so, there would be less need to divert a few dozen actual human embryos from their appointment with a petri dish, thus allowing opponents to more easily justify 'saving' the cells -- so that the material can rejoin the other half million or so blastocyst Americans microscopic blobs which are incinerated each year.

Given the two outcomes and the potential benefits, one would think the calculation is so easy to make that even a neocon could do it. But 160 Republicans and 16 Democrats voted against the SCREA, against the majorityof the electorate, and agree with Mr. 28% who has renewed his vow to veto it.