There are those who would have you believe that stem-cell research would start an industry of women getting pregnant, then having an abortion in order to sell the embryo to a research laboratory. The folks who came up with that canard 1) are lying and they know it, and 2) very sick puppies!

As I had it explained to me by someone who knows, the embryos that would be used for stem-cell research are the by-products of work in fertility clinics in their efforts to help childless couples who want children   Some of the woman's eggs are removed and they are fertilized in a Petri dish with the husband's sperm (I may not be totally accurate on some of the details here, but this is essentially what happens). They generally fertilize several of the eggs, because not all of them "take" (otherwise, only one would be necessary). They then implant one of the fertilized eggs in the woman's uterus. If this fails, they take another of the eggs and try again until either it works or it turns out to be futile. If it simply doesn't work, the couple may try other options; adoption, perhaps.

But there are often fertilized eggs left over. Since they are genetically the same as a natural child of the couple from whom they were derived, the couple may not want the eggs to be used for another couple. Nor, for that matter, would the other couple want a child that is not genetically their own (unless, of course, they ultimately opt for adoption, but that's another story).

What to do with the left-over fertilized eggs? Until the possibility of stem-cell research emerged, they were simply disposed of. Nothing else could be done with them. And they couldn't be kept forever.

So—stem-cell research offers these otherwise literally dead-end embryos the possibility of contributing to the pool of life in a very beneficial way, rather than simply being, as I said above, scraped off the Petri dish and disposed of as "biological waste."

Ethically, morally, it seems clear to me.

###

Not wrong at all, John. And sorry you don't like the underlining, but that indicates how I would say it if we were talking about it face to face. It isn't important.

But then, let's take another look at Limbaugh. Maybe, as far as he's concerned, it is (sorry about that) important. The clip linked to shows Limbaugh's little pantomime for only a few seconds as he accuses Fox of "acting." I recall the uncontrollable movements of Bill, the organist I spoke of above, and Fox's movements were the same thing—a symptom of fairly advanced Parkinson's Disease. In Bill's case, and I'm quite sure in Fox's, some days are better than others. Fox looked pretty genuine to me. I've seen that before.

But what Limbaugh was doing was definitely mocking Fox. It was like imitating someone's limp or their speech impediment, which is bad enough, and then claiming that they're only doing it to get sympathy, which is unconsionable.

Not only is Rush Limbaugh a stupid, lying blowhard, but now we all know that he has a cruel streak as well.

Let's just dismiss him as the gobbet of pond scum that he is and concentrate on the possibilities that stem-cell research can offer.

Now THAT is what's important. (And I'm not sorry at all about the underlining)

Don Firth