I have been especially hard on Sen. John McCain for his pro-death stance on embryonic stem cell research, and I will continue to be until he changes. But does he now have a reason to change his mind (and heart)? Time magazine features potential scientific breakthroughs in reprogramming adult stem cells. Here’s an excerpt:
After nearly a decade of setbacks and false starts, stem-cell science finally seems to be hitting its stride. Just a year after Japanese scientists first reported that they had generated stem cells by reprogramming adult skin cells — without using embryos — American researchers have managed to use that groundbreaking technique to achieve another scientific milestone. They created the first nerve cells from reprogrammed stem cells — an important demonstration of the potential power of stem-cell-based treatments to cure disease.
Led by Kevin Eggan at the Harvard Stem Cell Institute and Christopher Henderson at Columbia University, the 13-person team reported online today in Science Express that they had generated motor neurons from the skin cells of two elderly patients with a rare form of ALS, or Lou Gehrig’s disease, a progressive neurodegenerative condition. The new study marks an important first step on the road toward real stem-cell-based therapies, and also answers several plaguing questions about the pioneering stem-cell technique known as induced pluripotent stem cell, or iPS, generation.
Aside from a few understandable reservations on the part of researchers, which could be resolved in a matter of months, this could give John McCain a reason to change his mind on embryonic stem cell research. Remember his words in Florida during a primary campaign speech:
A woman asked McCain at his West Palm Beach town hall if he will change his position to oppose federal funding for embryonic stem cells research in light of new developments. McCain said he’s very encouraged “by the information you just relayed and I agree it has tremendous potential to eliminate an issue which has divided our pro-life community and eliminate the need for embryonic stem cell research. We’re not there yet. According to a growing body of scientific opinion, we are approaching it. I look forward to that day. I’m not changing my position yet, but I am encouraged by the progress that has been made.
Will John McCain convert to a pro-life position on ESCR? If so, perhaps his position on abortion, which is suspect to any real pro-lifer, will also shift. I have stated before that the abortion debate now hinges on ESCR, not Roe v. Wade. If a president were to sign a congressional bill to federally fund ESCR, then the abortion battle, I believe, will be all but lost. Let us pray that McCain (and even Barack Obama, for that matter), will change his mind on ESCR now that the scientific breakthroughs in adult stem cell research can no longer remain hidden from public view.
July 31, 2008 at 5:19 pm
Let us pray that McCain (and even Barack Obama, for that matter), will change his mind on ESCR now that the scientific breakthroughs in adult stem cell research can no longer remain hidden from public view.
Amen.
July 31, 2008 at 6:54 pm
There is talk of McCain picking a pro-choice running mate (Tom Ridge). That would be interesting.
July 31, 2008 at 8:27 pm
Fwiw, I recently participated in a Catholics for McCain conference call, and I specifically raised this issue, and noted that it continues to be a stumbling block for many Catholics who would otherwise vote for McCain. I also stated that given the recent advancements in science with respect to adult stem cell research (which you highlight in this post), it made little sense for McCain to hold fast to his support of federally funding and supporting ESCR in general. The answer I received was that McCain was watching this issue carefully, that he respects the position of pro-life Catholics, and that he hopes this issue will soon be moot.
I pray for that as well, but in the meantime I will continue to harp on this issue with Team McCain, as his position on ESCR is patently unacceptable.
July 31, 2008 at 8:31 pm
…he respects the position of pro-life Catholics…
Isn’t that special?
July 31, 2008 at 8:38 pm
MI-
Well, it beats the heck out of Obama, who wants to make signing the the Freedom of Choice Act into law his first act as president.
Like I said, McCain’s position on ESCR is far from perfect. But to his credit, he is not against providing basic medical care to babies who survive an abortion.
July 31, 2008 at 8:59 pm
The answer I received was that McCain was watching this issue carefully, that he respects the position of pro-life Catholics, and that he hopes this issue will soon be moot.
I wonder if by “moot” he means that Catholics will forget about it and concentrate on other issues or that his change in position will render the Catholic concern unnecessary.
July 31, 2008 at 9:02 pm
By moot, he meant that advancements in adult stem cell research would render the issue all but moot. At least that is how I took it in context.
July 31, 2008 at 10:04 pm
I will indeed pray that McCain comes to his senses on this issue, and this news about the science is encouraging. That said, McCain’s reasoning leaves such a bad taste in my mouth:
I will run to the overused (and often inflammatory) analogy: let’s say in WWII Germany, the Nazis are systematically subjecting members of the Jewish race to experimental tests that would invariably kill them. But the results of that homicidal research (probably very much unlike experiments performed in actual history) showed great promise for curing many ailments of the German people.
If a member of the Nazi party, or whatever party, running for office held the position that until it can be definitively shown that the same advances can be made without systematically killing Jews, would we give a whole lot of credit.
Though I agree that next to the position of Obama it seems the lesser of two evils on the issue.
Pax Christi,
July 31, 2008 at 11:03 pm
Feddie,
I hope you’re right. Unfortunately, it appears that despite the fact that McCain’s position on ESCR is utterly unacceptable by Catholic standards, some Catholics (e.g., Oswald Sobrino, Deal Hudson) will continue to extol the “character” and “virtue” of McCain, even devoting countless hours to building websites that supposedly make the Catholic case for him. I think the most Catholic thing (N.B., I did not say the only Catholic thing) is to resist McCain rather than to concede by supporting McCain.
Let’s not even get started with Obama.
July 31, 2008 at 11:08 pm
Well, as you know, McCain was not my first choice. And I certainly respect those Catholics who do not feel comfortable voting for either McCain or Obama.
July 31, 2008 at 11:09 pm
Dare we hope?
July 31, 2008 at 11:18 pm
lol Poli. As if some posters on this web-site don’t use it primarily “to extol the “character” and “virtue” of [Obama]…devoting countless hours to build…the Catholic case for him.” If one annoys you, shouldn’t the other?
August 1, 2008 at 12:31 am
And I certainly respect those Catholics who do not feel comfortable voting for either McCain or Obama.
But do you respect those who, like yourself, make a compromising decision to vote for Obama?
August 1, 2008 at 6:31 am
MI-
Given that Obama has one of the worst public records on life issues in the history of the United States, I do not believe that voting for Obama ia a legitimate choice for faithful Catholics.
August 1, 2008 at 8:15 am
I think it will be a moot point around mid-November, after Obama wins handily.
August 1, 2008 at 11:17 am
Given that Obama has one of the worst public records on life issues in the history of the United States, I do not believe that voting for Obama ia a legitimate choice for faithful Catholics.
Of course. One compromise with intrinsic evil is acceptable (your compromise, surprise surprise) and the other is not.
August 1, 2008 at 11:44 am
Zak-
I wouldn’t count on it:
http://www.gallup.com/poll/election2008.aspx
MI-
I am not compromising on the issue. McCain is dead wrong on ESCR, and I will continue to press his people on the matter. But as between McCain and “Born Alive” Obama, the choice is clear.
August 1, 2008 at 11:49 am
I am not compromising on the issue.
If you no not feel you are compromising by voting for McCain (which is the compromise I am talking about), then you are not thinking as a Catholic.
August 1, 2008 at 11:59 am
MI-
Well, thanks for the “infallible” declaration, but I think I’ll stick with then Cardinal Ratzinger’s guidelines for voting, rather than yours.
August 1, 2008 at 12:26 pm
Fedster,
If you think voting for McCain does not involve a compromise on your part, then your real allegiance is to the party, not to the Church. You assume a smooth fit between the Republican party and Catholicism. It’s a real shame that you think Ratzinger’s statements support such a crazy idea.
August 1, 2008 at 12:57 pm
MI-
I’ll try to walk you through this.
Sneator McCain is against abortion (except in cases of rape, incest, and life of the mother). He also opposes euthanasia and cloning. He strongly believes in promoting adoption and also in protecting traditional marriage. McCain also “opposes the intentional creation of human embryos for research purposes,” and “voted to ban the practice of ‘fetal farming,’ making it a federal crime for researchers to use cells or fetal tissue from an embryo created for research purposes.” McCain also voted to “ban attempts to use or obtain human cells gestated in animals.”
See this link, for quotes:
http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/Issues/95b18512-d5b6-456e-90a2-12028d71df58.htm
And while he wrongly supports federal funding for ESCR, he at least has noted the following:
“Where federal funds are used for stem cell research, . . . clear lines should be drawn that reflect a refusal to sacrifice moral values and ethical principles for the sake of scientific progress, and that any such research should be subject to strict federal guidelines.”
That is far from perfect, and still patently unacceptable, but it is far better than Obama’s views on the issue–which brings us to the “proportionate reasons” question.
In my view, the Cardinal Ratzinger’s letter makes two things clear: (1) not all issues are of equal importance (i.e., life issues are of the greatest concern); and (2) it is permissible to vote for someone who supports an intrinsic evil if there are proportionate reasons for doing so.
Because life issues are of the greatest concern to the Church, I am basing my vote on the respective public records and statements of McCain and Obama on these issues. A cursory review reveals that McCain, while far from perfect on life issues, is light years ahead of Obama, who is completely wedded to the proabortion movement in this country.
In sum, I am voting for McCain in spite of his support of ESCR. I will not compromise on this issue. But, as previously noted, there are only two viable presidential contenders; and I am not inclined to risk the lives of millions of innocent children vis-s-vis the election of Barack Obama simply for the purpose of meeting some Catholic purity test that you’re inclined to impose.
August 1, 2008 at 1:07 pm
That is far from perfect, and still patently unacceptable, but…
And yet you still insist that you are not compromising by casting a vote for McCain.
War is a life issue that you conveniently omit from your moral calculus. And so is torture.
Look, vote for McCain. Just admit that by doing so, you are indeed compromising. Otherwise it seems clear that you think he is the perfect Catholic candidate.
August 1, 2008 at 1:31 pm
I should have mentioned torture, but I’ve been clear that I oppose it in all instances, and McCain has been an eloquent spokesperson against torture. After all, unlike either of us, he understands all too well what it is like to be tortured.
Now, please explain how many decision to vote for McCain fails to meet the proportionate reasons test outlined by the Holy Father.
August 1, 2008 at 1:33 pm
make that: “how my decision”
August 1, 2008 at 1:38 pm
Michael — why are you acting as if you care about consistent agreement with the Church? From other threads, it’s obvious that you disagree with the Church whenever you feel like it.
August 1, 2008 at 1:42 pm
2) it is permissible to vote for someone who supports an intrinsic evil if there are proportionate reasons for doing so.
Fedsterama, let me walk you through this. “Proportionate reasons” refer to the reasons why someone might compromise and vote for a non-ideal candidate. My voting McCain you are compromising. What don’t you understand?
McCain has been an eloquent spokesperson against torture.
Spokesperson, sure. How about the votes?
August 1, 2008 at 1:43 pm
I thought Shinya Yamanaka ended this debate last year.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/11/science/11prof.html
“When I saw the embryo, I suddenly realized there was such a small difference between it and my daughters,” said Dr. Yamanaka, 45, a father of two and now a professor at the Institute for Integrated Cell-Material Sciences at Kyoto University. “I thought, we can’t keep destroying embryos for our research. There must be another way.”
After years of searching, and at times almost giving up in despair, Dr. Yamanaka may have found that alternative. Last month, his was one of two groups of researchers that independently announced they had successfully turned adult skin cells into the equivalent of human embryonic stem cells without using an actual embryo.
August 1, 2008 at 1:47 pm
From other threads, it’s obvious that you disagree with the Church whenever you feel like it.
Whenever I feel like it? Does it make sense to disagree with the Church when one doesn’t feel like it?
In fact, I disagree with Church teaching on only a couple matters. And they are matters of practice, not anything central. I do not disagree with the Church on any life issues. Eddie Fedder here seems to dismiss certain life issues at the expense of others, believing that he is not compromising anything. He’s deluded.
August 1, 2008 at 1:54 pm
MI-
I still don’t see how I am compromising on the issue of ESCR by voting for a candidate that I believe has a better position on that issue than the alternative, or by following the guidelines established by the Holy Father. If you take issue with then Cardinal Ratzinger’s guidelines, then it seems to me that you’re the one whose thinking on these matters is questionable.
August 1, 2008 at 1:58 pm
As for McCain’s views on torture, you’ll have to point me to something more credible than the Huffington Post.
In any event, is allowing a child who survives an abortion to slowly die for lack of medical care torture? Is it murder? Or is it both? I am just curious whether your outrage on these issues is selective, as it often seems to be.
August 1, 2008 at 2:10 pm
If you take issue with then Cardinal Ratzinger’s guidelines…
I don’t. It’s dishonest of you to suggest that I do, but I don’t expect much better from you.
As for McCain’s views on torture, you’ll have to point me to something more credible than the Huffington Post.
They’re reporting on his voting record, which is not simply an opinion. If they’re wrong about it, produce some evidence. Simply dismissing the publication because of your partisan preferences won’t cut it.
In any event, is allowing a child who survives an abortion to slowly die for lack of medical care torture? Is it murder? Or is it both? I am just curious whether your outrage on these issues is selective, as it often seems to be.
Of course it’s both torture and murder. I have never given you any reason to think that my outrage is selective. I have always been against abortion, as well as wars fought “to defend our way of life,” a way of life that includes abortion. When I criticize american ideology I frequently refer to abortion as one of the primary sacraments of the american way of life.
I have also repeatedly said that a vote for Obama is a huge compromise, and should I vote for him I will admit that compromise again. Have I not even said that perhaps the best choice is to refrain from voting?
But you aren’t able to admit that your vote involves a compromise because your true allegiance is to the party above all else. The U.S. bishops teach that Catholics are politically homeless in this two party system. You do not feel homeless, and you will not admit that you are compromising because you are acting out of your true faith: Republicanism.
August 1, 2008 at 2:24 pm
MI-
I see no reason to debate this with you any further. Any reasonable observer can read this exchange and determine for themselves who made this “personal.”
I will, howver, note in conclusion that, unlike you, I’ve actually taken on my party in a very public way by opposing a proabortion Republican presidential candidate (who at that time was leading in the national polls). The notion that I care more for the Republican Party than the teachings of the Catholic Church is beyond ridiculous.
I strongly oppose ESCR, and will continue to do so. By deciding to vote for McCain, I am simply choosing between the best of the remaining two candidates on life issues. I fail to see how that decision is not in line with the teachings of the Catholic Church.
I’ll let you have the last word on the matter.
August 1, 2008 at 3:48 pm
Any reasonable observer can read this exchange and determine for themselves who made this “personal.”
Yes, you made it personal with your comment that you personally do not feel that you are compromising at all when you cast a vote for McCain.
I will, howver, note in conclusion that, unlike you, I’ve actually taken on my party in a very public way by opposing a proabortion Republican presidential candidate…
I am not affiliated with any political party.
I strongly oppose ESCR, and will continue to do so. By deciding to vote for McCain, I am simply choosing between the best of the remaining two candidates on life issues.
And by doing so, you are compromising.
I fail to see how that decision is not in line with the teachings of the Catholic Church.
Your decision to vote McCain is not contrary to Catholic teaching. Your insistence that you are not compromising is the problem.
I’ll let you have the last word on the matter.
Thanks.