R
rhtaylor
Guest
A new pro-choice, pro-science think tank called the Women’s Bioethics Project, has released a report called, “Bioethics and Public Policy: Conservative Dominance in the Current Landscape.” I thought to myself, how is that possible? Conservatives dominating the bioethics landscape? Is that like the mythical “conservative” media?
After reading the report, I may have to agree with Kathryn Hinsch, the founder of the Women’s Bioethics Project. She contends that conservative groups dominate all areas of bioethics (i.e. euthanasia, cloning, stem cell research, abortion, reproductive technologies) because we all agree on the idea of “human dignity.” (Human dignity is always in quotations as if it is some fictional idea.) We not only agree, we collaborate. Progressive groups on the other hand do not have a common base and therefore tackle each issue separately. According to Hinsch, this makes them weak. What Hinsch does not mention is the reason they do not have a common base: the moral relativism that makes them progressive.
As a conservative I have always assumed that liberals were as cohesive on bioethical issues as conservatives. I was wrong. Some women’s rights groups, while being pro-abortion, are against cloning because they fear that women will be exploited for their eggs. Pro-environmentalist groups are against genetic engineering in plants and animals but not necessarily in humans. Some liberal groups are for pre-natal diagnosis and eugenics by abortion, while some realize that this naturally discriminates against the disabled. Some progressive groups want genetic engineering in humans while others are afraid it will further widen the gap between the rich who can afford to “upgrade” their children, and the poor who cannot. When progressives rejected the idea of “human dignity” (or used it only when it suited their agenda) they lost any common ground they might share on bioethical issues. Read the "Bioethics and Public Policy: Conservative Dominance in the Current Landscape” It is very interesting!
Rebecca Taylor
www.MaryMeetsDolly.com
A Catholic’s Guide to Genetics, Genetic Engineering and Biotehcnology
After reading the report, I may have to agree with Kathryn Hinsch, the founder of the Women’s Bioethics Project. She contends that conservative groups dominate all areas of bioethics (i.e. euthanasia, cloning, stem cell research, abortion, reproductive technologies) because we all agree on the idea of “human dignity.” (Human dignity is always in quotations as if it is some fictional idea.) We not only agree, we collaborate. Progressive groups on the other hand do not have a common base and therefore tackle each issue separately. According to Hinsch, this makes them weak. What Hinsch does not mention is the reason they do not have a common base: the moral relativism that makes them progressive.
As a conservative I have always assumed that liberals were as cohesive on bioethical issues as conservatives. I was wrong. Some women’s rights groups, while being pro-abortion, are against cloning because they fear that women will be exploited for their eggs. Pro-environmentalist groups are against genetic engineering in plants and animals but not necessarily in humans. Some liberal groups are for pre-natal diagnosis and eugenics by abortion, while some realize that this naturally discriminates against the disabled. Some progressive groups want genetic engineering in humans while others are afraid it will further widen the gap between the rich who can afford to “upgrade” their children, and the poor who cannot. When progressives rejected the idea of “human dignity” (or used it only when it suited their agenda) they lost any common ground they might share on bioethical issues. Read the "Bioethics and Public Policy: Conservative Dominance in the Current Landscape” It is very interesting!
Rebecca Taylor
www.MaryMeetsDolly.com
A Catholic’s Guide to Genetics, Genetic Engineering and Biotehcnology