I have been religiously following the debate on Stem Cells.
I'm not sure why I haven't jumped in sooner. What I have
been doing is reassessing my own system of values as it
relates to this complex subject. Part of this evaluation has
forced me to go back and look at the definition of words
that are used in the debate. Words like zygote, blastula,
totipotent and pluripotent were not part of my everyday
vocabulary so I sent those definitions to the list a few
days ago.

Religion, morals, ethics and science are a part of my every
day vocabulary but tonight I found myself going back and
re-examining those words too. So I am forwarding those to
the list as part of this commentary.

It seems to me the issues fall into two categories:

The first is science and the second is belief systems. The
science of a single life form has a starting and an ending
point.  The belief systems that interpret those points are
almost never ending. Science relies heavily on knowledge,
quantitative knowledge. Belief systems involve reverence for
a supernatural power or absence of reverence for a
supernatural power both tempered by knowledge. Ethics and
morality seem to flow logically from the application of
belief systems and knowledge. Some people place greater
emphasis on the belief system, others place greater emphasis
on the science and others try to wrestle with the two.

For me it has been nearly impossible to separate these two
issues. My belief system is that life should be protected
and preserved. I used to add "at all cost." Our ability to
extend life through artificial means that don't always
address the quality of life has caused me to reconsider the
"at all cost" phrase.

My belief system has been that life begins at conception. My
knowledge now causes me to challenge that notion. I now
know, or I think I know that a female is born with all her
eggs in place at birth. This is more than she can ever use
during her childbearing years or even during her lifetime. I
also know that a male is capable of producing more sperm
than he could ever use to fertilize and egg. Therefore the
potential to produce life through traditionally acceptable
means (sanctioned monogamous relationships) allows most
potential life giving zygotes to die.

 Thirty years ago I might have thought of this as a
curiosity of nature. As a pro-life thinker today I find
myself asking why all this death? Could it be that the
supernatural power that I do believe exists is revealing new
life opportunities to me or am I somehow violating the
ethical bounds imposed by my traditional belief systems that
are based on my knowledge and the knowledge of many
generations that have preceded me.

My leaning today is to allow the exploration, some would
call it exploitation, of these life or potential life forms
to proceed in a guarded and regulated way. I would proceed
based on the knowledge we possess and the body of belief
systems including religious beliefs that provide the moral
and ethical constraints that have served mankind so well. I
believe the NIH guidelines provide those constraints.

Do I have concerns about the potential abuses that can
result? Absolutely. The scientists that created the first
atomic bomb were deeply troubled by the potential for abuse.
Many pleaded to stop the research. It took nineteen months.
Nearly sixty years later we still have the same concerns.
Despite these concerns there have been many advances that
mankind has experienced including many medical advances
based on that discovery. The sole purpose of that effort was
to kill to end the killing. So far, I believe that promise
has been fulfilled.

It seems to me that science may be able to establish when
life begins but each belief system will continue to spin
that knowledge to support their particular view of when it
begins. While the taking of any life troubles me, and
probably always will, my spin on my newly acquired knowledge
is that the current use of excess embryo's to end the
killing caused by disease seems morally and ethically
justified.

I welcome comments.

Respectfully,

Bob Martone
[log in to unmask]
http://www.samlink.com/~bmartone

--------------------------------------------------------
Definitions for religion, ethics, amoral, moral, and science
follow.
------------------------------------
Religion -
Belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers
regarded as creator and governor of the universe.
A personal or institutionalized system grounded in such
belief and worship.
The life or condition of a person in a religious order.
A set of beliefs, values, and practices based on the
teachings of a spiritual leader.
A cause, a principle, or an activity pursued with zeal or
conscientious devotion.
----------------------------------

Ethic
A set of principles of right conduct.
A theory or a system of moral values: "An ethic of service
is at war with a craving for gain" (Gregg Easterbrook).
ethics. (used with a sing. verb)The study of the general
nature of morals and of the specific moral choices to be
made by a person; moral philosophy.
ethics. (used with a sing. or pl. verb)The rules or
standards governing the conduct of a person or the members
of a profession: medical ethics.
Amoral - Adjective
Not admitting of moral distinctions or judgments; neither
moral nor immoral.
Lacking moral sensibility; not caring about right and wrong.
----------------------------
Moral - adjective
Of or concerned with the judgment of the goodness or badness
of human action and character: moral scrutiny; a moral
quandary.
Teaching or exhibiting goodness or correctness of character
and behavior: a moral lesson.
Conforming to standards of what is right or just in
behavior; virtuous: a moral life.
Arising from conscience or the sense of right and wrong: a
moral obligation.
Having psychological rather than physical or tangible
effects: a moral victory; moral support.
Based on strong likelihood or firm conviction, rather than
on the actual evidence: a moral certainty.
noun.
The lesson or principle contained in or taught by a fable, a
story, or an event.
A concisely expressed precept or general truth; a maxim.
morals. Rules or habits of conduct, especially of sexual
conduct, with reference to standards of right and wrong: a
person of loose morals; a decline in the public morals.

morally  adverb
Synonyms: moral, ethical, virtuous, righteous.
These adjectives mean in accord with principles or rules of
right or good conduct. Moral applies to personal character
and behavior, especially sexual conduct, measured against
prevailing standards of rectitude: "The fact that man knows
right from wrong proves his intellectual superiority to the
other creatures; but the fact that he can do wrong proves
his moral inferiority to any creature that cannot" (Mark
Twain). Ethical stresses conformity with idealistic
standards of right and wrong, as those applicable to the
practices of lawyers and doctors: "The world has achieved
brilliance without conscience. Ours is a world of nuclear
giants and ethical infants" (Omar N. Bradley). Virtuous
implies moral excellence and loftiness of character; in a
narrower sense it refers to sexual chastity: "The life of
the nation is secure only while the nation is honest,
truthful, and virtuous" (Frederick Douglass). Righteous
emphasizes moral uprightness and especially the absence of
guilt or sin; when it is applied to actions, reactions, or
impulses, it often implies justifiable outrage: "The
effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much"
(James 5:16). "He was . . . stirred by righteous wrath"
(John Galsworthy).
------------------------------------------
Science
The observation, identification, description, experimental
investigation, and theoretical explanation of phenomena.
Such activities restricted to a class of natural phenomena.
Such activities applied to an object of inquiry or study.
Methodological activity, discipline, or study: I've got
packing a suitcase down to a science.
An activity that appears to require study and method: the
science of purchasing.
Knowledge, especially that gained through experience.
----------------------------------------