There is a video on of Sen. Sam Brownback giving a just fantastic talk on stem cell research (which you can find here:

The talk is being made, by the way, as part of a discussion on a bill which would expand federal support for stem cell research (which Bush, being the God-loving patriot he is, intends to veto, anyway, now that it’s passed).

If you have watched the video, then you know that what Sen. Brownback is actually talking about is not stem cell research, but “Hannah,” who was adopted as a frozen embryo — and, as Sen. Brownback points out, said embryos are called a “snowflakes.” I think we can all agree that that is a cute name for a frozen embryo. (And I don’t know about Sen. Brownback, but personally, I love to stick out my tongue when it’s snowing and let snowflakes fall on it, and then I eat them. I know it seems childish, but it brings me more joy than protesting abortion mills, and believe me, that brings me joy: there is almost nothing more fulfilling than making a teenage girl weep while on her way into a Planned Parenthood building. I say “almost” because of the whole snowflake thing.) It’s rather interesting that those frozen embryos aren’t called, I dunno, people, but that’s not the point. You see, the point is, to Sen. Brownback and to me, that this thing that was once an embryo is now a little girl called Hannah, so she has become a person, and what right do we have to play God by destroying thousands of little Hannahs in the name of research? Sure, it could be argued that the embryos scientists want to use for research are being destroyed by the thousands, anyway, as biological waste, side products of in vitro fertilization, and so they might as well be used in research which could potentially save the lives of the walking, talking, living, loving human beings that cover our planet right now, that none of them would be denied a waiting uterus in the name of research if said uterus was in fact waiting, and that said embryos are not persons (they’re snowflakes!), but a collection of cells with no feelings and no personality — but to make such arguments one would have to be a Dumbocrat liberal intellectual of the most repugnant (atheist) variety.

This debate is a matter of principle. These embryos, you see, are persons in principle, if not in fact. And maybe they are being destroyed anyway, but to destroy them through research is wrong. It is actively destroying a living thing (as opposed to them simply being discarded, which is also wrong, but less wrong); it is an immoral means to an end. It doesn’t matter that these embryos are being destroyed anyway. That isn’t the point. I know it, you know it, President Bush knows it, and Sen. Brownback knows it.

So, human lives could be saved by doing research on embryos which are being destroyed anyway — is that all you lefties got in the way of an argument? Well, it’ll take more than logic to budge me, and it’ll take more than logic to budge my man Bush, too.



  1. Ted says:

    See, on this post, I think you’re making a legitimate point, but sarcastically.

    Either way, I like your style and your sharpness, though I hope you were kidding about the abortion clinic protesting – nothing Christian about kicking someone when they’re down.

  2. Lisa says:

    Your writing inspires me. Thanks for this blog…more people need to fight for human life or else it will cease to exist after they start aborting children to save lives. Oxymoron anyone?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: