I just finished reading an article about some of the things our new President is looking to do as soon as he takes office, and I find it devastatingly ironic.
Obama wants to use executive orders to reverse a couple of Bush executive orders, regarding oil and gas drilling, and stem cell research. I'm not here to discuss my views on executive orders, maybe that will come at another time. But the dichotomy here is amazing.
I don't know how long that article will be at that link, but hopefully you'll get a chance to read it.
I'm also going to post the comment I made to Michael's previous post on abortion. It should get you up to speed on my thoughts on the issue of human being.
An approach to the question that I once heard that I found intriguing took the issue of a question of when life begins to a question of 'being' or 'existence.'Basically, 'scientists' can aruge when life begins. Are sperm and eggs separately alive? What about when they combine? What about when limbs form or the baby moves (as mentioned above). What about at birth? As Michael points out, all this is greatly debatable. When sperm and egg come together to form the zygote, there is human being. Existence. What is that existence? Is it alive? I don't know. It certainly couldn't survive on its own. But it's still an existence that is not entirely it's mother's. The argument for the person who explained this theory then, is that that existence, that human being, cannot be obliterated intentionally by human means. Doing so would be destroying existence, an existence uniquely independent in a way, a valuable in having its own existence, its own human being.
In the same breath, Obama wants to stop oil and gas drilling "in some of the most senstive, fragile lands in Utah," and remove federal spending limits on embryonic stem cell research.
Save the trees, kill the human beings.
And this is just the business of day one.