I am becoming increasingly concerned about the inability of those who support embryo destructive research to be either honest or coherent. We are left with hoping that the current president and a former president are embarrassingly ignorant, because the alternative is that they are willingly evil.
How else do explain former President Bill Clinton talking to Sanjay Gupta about the embryos that can reasonably be destroyed being those that have no hope of being fertilized? Huh?!!! I would like to think that he is just misspeaking as we are all prone to do from time to time, but he keeps saying it. And Gupta never corrects him. This is supposed to be Mr. Clinton helping President Obama morally justify the decision to reverse former President Bush’s Executive Orders concerning federal funding of embryo destructive research. Mr. Clinton even calls it a pro-life move!
It is comforting to know that the people making the decisions about destroying countless nascent human lives in the name of progress have such a firm grasp on the issue. Obama hates all cloning that produces people as it is wickedly immoral. He only supports cloning that guarantees a dead clone through research. Clinton is convinced that as long as we are only exploiting “unfertilized” embryos as a resource everything is hunky dory and even pro-life.
Wow. Evil or ignorant, ignorant or evil. I honestly don’t know which one to choose.
HT: Stand to Reason Blog
*I am adding this event timeline to help the former leader of the free world out: Sperm and egg meet, fertilization occurs, a zygote is present (new distinct human life has begun), cells multiply and our new human life moves into the embryonic stage of development. So you see Mr. Clinton, there is no such thing as an unfertilized embryo.*
Clinton mentioned it before - On Larry King:
ReplyDelete"But this stem cell research, if the stem cells are frozen embryonic stem cells, if they are never going to be used to be fertilized, to bring a life into being, then I think making them available for medical research is the pro-life position and I honestly don't understand - I would understand it if we were going and raiding stem cell banks, where these stem cells were going to be used to actually fertilize eggs and have babies."
[HT-Jill Stanek ]
The question now - did Clinton ever talk publicly on this issue and provide the correct understanding. If so - then I'd lean towards a nefarious effort on his part.
I used this clip in a Sunday School class on pro-life issues. After 20 minutes of discussion on SCR I played the clip without explanation and asked what the students thought of it. They were stunned. Less than a minute into the clip they began asking "Did he just say what I think he said?"
ReplyDeleteEither the former president is unbelievably ignorant of facts of life or he is perfectly aware of what he is saying and is deliberately obfuscating the truth for political reasons. Historical precedent allows us to make a judgment about the probability of either of those. But, whichever is the case, the bottom line is that misinformation is being spread and left unchallenged by those (Gupta is an M.D.) who know better.