Will we say no to genetically modified humans?

Jul 28, 2015 by

By Peter Franklin, Conservative Home: It’s easy to forget that eugenic ideas were once mainstream and exercised their pernicious influence far beyond Nazi Germany. In the future, however, it may be transgenics not eugenics that we have to worry about. Genetic modification is a technique that can be applied to human DNA, not just plant and animal DNA. Currently we place moral and legal limits on doing so, but how long will this last? It’s a question considered by Eugene Volokh in theWashington Post. He begins by referring to a Pew poll on the acceptability of genetically engineering a baby to enhance its intelligence: “83 percent of Americans said it’s not appropriate, and only 15 percent said it was appropriate.” Volokh appears to count himself among the minority, but whether one approves or not is besides the point, he says – GM humans are going to happen anyway: “Say the Chinese don’t see things the way we do. Out come some number of babies with horrible birth defects (truly a tragedy, and as a purely ethical matter, possibly a reason against such experimentation; I’m just saying the ethics won’t matter much). And then things get worked out, and now the new generation of Chinese, or Japanese, or Russians becomes on average much smarter than the new generation of Americans. How long will American public opinion remain opposed to a technology that seems vital to national success, and perhaps even national independence?” In other words, the West can’t impose its morality on the rest of the world, but the rest of world would, given the chance, out-compete the West. A further point is that is that even in countries where it is banned, the rich will still find a way of getting hold of any sufficiently advantageous technology: “They’re rich, so they can go overseas to get it (even if they don’t want to risk the domestic black market). Hard to stop that without some pretty intrusive monitoring, even if there was the will to try.” One of the strongest arguments against genetically enhanced intelligence is that it would create a genetic underclass. Volokh’s counter-argument is that if we don’t make the technology widely available we’ll have a genetic overclass instead. Read here...

read more

Physician fired from hospital for discussing medical dangers of homosexual behavior

Jul 28, 2015 by

PETITION TO REINSTATE DR CHURCH (not restricted to US residents) From MassResistance: This Wednesday and Thursday, July 29-30, the appeal hearing for Dr. Paul Church will take place. It will include lawyers, “evidence”, and witnesses, as his hospital attempts to seal his firing. On March 30, Dr. Church, a well-respected urologist, was expelled from the medical staff of Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (BIDMC), a major Harvard-affiliated hospital in Boston. Dr. Church’s crime? He voiced concerns to his colleagues and hospital staff about the unhealthy nature of homosexual behavior and objected to the hospital’s aggressive promotion of “gay pride” activities. As we’ve reported, for years the hospital has been aggressive in its attempts to silence and punish Dr. Church. (See the timeline of events.) Specifically, Dr. Church is being charged with posting three short comments on the BIDMC internal website during 2013 and 2014 in violation of a gag order issued in 2011 regarding comments about homosexual behavior. One of his postings was about the health consequences of those behaviors, and two contained Bible verses regarding the morality of the behavior. Dangerous and frightening The fact that a physician’s internal discussion of medical facts and morality is now considered a firing offense by a major hospital is a very dangerous and frightening state of affairs. People everywhere should be outraged. Dr. Church has been a urologist on the BIDMC staff in Boston for nearly 30 years. He is a member of the Harvard Medical School faculty. He has done research on diagnosing prostate and bladder cancer, and has been a frequent volunteer for medical mission projects in Mexico and Africa. He has also spoken before educational and civic groups on the subject of high-risk sexual behaviors. Read here...

read more

Saturn devours his children

Jul 22, 2015 by

by Zac Alstin, MercatorNet: Human sacrifice for the benefit of all. A recent undercover operation by an antiabortion group has cast light on some of the gruesome details behind abortion clinics’ cooperation with biotech companies in the supply of aborted foetal remains for research purposes. The story is as grotesque as you might imagine, with the Planned Parenthood senior director of medical research detailing some of the ways in which her organisation could help meet the biotech companies’ needs: “We’ve been very good at getting heart, lung, liver, because we know that, so I’m not gonna crush that part, I’m gonna basically crush below, I’m gonna crush above, and I’m gonna see if I can get it all intact.” We aren’t accustomed to hearing human beings described in such a way, like meat cut to order, and part of the shock perhaps lies in the cavalier reminder that by ten weeks human foetuses do have functioning vital organs. Use of the term “crush” to describe the method is likewise highly evocative, and uncharacteristic in the usual context of abortion advocacy – where people are at pains to avoid language that might accurately describe the procedures taking place. The video is being used by antiabortion activists to support claims that Planned Parenthood is selling foetal organs to biotech companies. Planned Parenthood denies it is selling the organs, and the argument that it is merely receiving reimbursement for time and resources allocated to the donation of foetal tissue may see the allegations falter. Regardless of the legality of the process, donation of aborted foetal tissue for research purposes is not new. But in an era of increasingly commercialised biotech research, renewed attention to this macabre relationship between research, capital, and abortion is appropriately disturbing. Read here...

read more

Baby parts for sale: The unimaginable is now undeniable

Jul 15, 2015 by

by Jay Hobbs, LifeSite: In every effort for justice, progress, or victory, there’s a tipping point. A solitary stone flung from a sling. An unforgettable speech on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial. An image of a back so badly scarred from years of beatings that it seemed impossible for it to belong to a human being. A presidential announcement on the radio. Today, July 14, 2015, in the age of digital media, it’s fitting that a YouTube video will serve as our moment. Our tipping point. The day when abortion became unthinkable. What else are we to make of the Human Capital project’s initial release of a video capturing Planned Parenthood’s Senior Director of Medical Services chatting over the ghastly, reprehensible, and illegal enterprise of selling aborted baby body parts? This is the day when Big Abortion takes on too much water to stay afloat. Thanks to a three-year undercover investigation by David Daleiden of the Center for Medical Progress, today is when the unimaginable became undeniable. Surely the conscience of our neighbors—seared as it is in many cases—cannot abide the thought of funding activity where, not only are babies being killed, but the body parts of our little ones are being sold off to the highest bidder on a national, highly organized scale. Read here Read also:  Planned Parenthood: Selling aborted babies’ organs was a ‘humanitarian undertaking’...

read more

UK study shows massive surge in deadly STDs among gay men

Jun 26, 2015 by

By Lisa Bourne, LifeSite: A steep jump in cases of two deadly sexually transmitted diseases in the UK has been found among homosexual men, a new study says. Figures from the Public Health England (PHE) indicate the increase in cases of syphilis and gonorrhea among homosexual males rose considerably higher than that of the general population, prompting health experts to say the problem must be a public health priority and that this is likely just “the tip of the iceberg.” While the study showed a slight dip in sexually transmitted diseases overall, the impact of the diseases remains the greatest among young people under 25, and in particular homosexual men, bisexual men and other men who have sex with men. “The stats published today show that too many people are getting STIs,” said Doctor Gwenda Hughes, head the PHE department that overseas STDs. “Reducing this spread must be a public health priority. We are particularly concerned about the large rises in diagnoses among gay men.” This concern was repeated by the leader of England’s Family Planning Association, who cautioned as well that the actual number of those who have contracted a sexually transmitted disease is unknown. “It is also concerning that young people under 25 and men who have sex with men continue to be disproportionately affected by STIs,” Natika Halil told the UK Daily Mail. The PHE study showed a total jump of 33 percent in cases of deadly syphilis, and the increase among homosexual men at 47 percent. Read here Read also:  Leading U.S. hospital fires doctor for raising concerns about health risks of gay sex by Pete Baklinski, LifeSite Read report here...

read more

Planning for a world with LGBT bioethics

Jun 14, 2015 by

by Michael Cook, BioEdge: With same-sex marriage and the transformation of Bruce Jenner into Caitlyn Jenner in the world headlines, it’s time to ask what LGBT bioethics would look like. Timothy Murphy, of the University of Illinois College of Medicine,  foreshadows some of the major themes in the journal Bioethics. Bioethics benefits. “Bioethics is better than it would otherwise have been, because people queer in their sexual interests and identities have challenged misconceived concepts of health and disease, challenged obstacles to access and equity in healthcare, and forced attention to professional standards in clinical care, among other things.” Defending LGBT parenting. To show that the battle is not completely over, Murphy cites Oxford philosopher John Finnis’s implacable opposition to adoption by male and female homosexuals as “intrinsically evil”. Putting “skepticism about LGBT people as fit parents fully behind it” will be one of the first tasks of fully developed LGBT bioethics. Promoting new reproductive technologies. In the not-too-distant future it may be possible to use stem cell technology to create synthetic gametes for gay and lesbian couples. This will allow them to raise their own genetic children. “This option would go a long way in helping transgender people express and consolidate their gender identity,” writes Murphy. Another development could be “male pregnancies”. Now that it is possible to transplant a uterus, why couldn’t males bear children? Paying for them. Shouldn’t insurers and the government pay for these very expensive technologies, if they already cover costs for heterosexual couples? “We need to begin asking these LGBT-centric questions.” Read here...

read more