A Modest Proposal ... for Horrific Evil

If human babies are going to be aborted, isn't it wasteful not to use their organs for transplants?

That's the proposal of the leading embryonic stem cell expert in Great Britain.

Professor Sir Richard Gardner of Oxford University, an advisor to the Royal Society and the Human Fertilization and Embryology Authority, made his comments at an Oxford International Biomedical Center conference, the Daily Mail reports.

Expressing surprise that the possibility has not been considered, he said using fetal tissues for organ transplant is “probably a more realistic technique in dealing with the shortage of kidney donors than others.”

Experiments in mice, he said, have shown that fetal kidneys grow extremely quickly when transplanted into adult animals.

Sir Gardner says it would be "at least a temporary solution." Oh sure. There is nothing more permanent than evil perpetrated as a temporary solution.

London obstetrician Professor Stuart Campbell has Sir Gardner's back.

“If they are going to be terminated, it is a shame to waste their organs,” he claimed.

“I am sure very few of those on the transplant list would rather die than accept an organ from an aborted fetus,” he told the Daily Mail.

This article illustrated two important points.

First, there is a direct link between embryonic stem cell research and abortion, which most people do not realize. This is where the embryonic stem cells originate. That's the first part of a loop in which some researchers clone the cells, begin the creation of a new embryo, and then kill that life. One goal is to produce spare parts tailored exclusively for individuals willing to pay for it. Kind of like the "insurance policies" in the movie, "The Island." Some die so that others can live.

Second, you can argue all you want about a woman's right to choose, and the unfairness of a family being saddled with too many (expensive) children, but the real issue for the "scientists" and the new industry of fetal harvesting is the potential profit from developing a new economy of spare parts from surplus people deemed insufficiently matured to be called human. And since the unborn are considered to be mere byproducts ("blobs of tissue") and even "diseases," according to some, no one is going to ask permission of the woman who have abortions whether their valuable byproducts can be harvested.

But you will know that we will have entered a new realm of depravity when someone starts paying women to abort their unborn children.

So many people who support abortion are also the same people who care about alleviating human suffering, who are genuinely horrified by man's inhumanity to man in places like Darfur, etc.

And I wonder, is it because they have not been told the truth about what is taking place in the laboratories, in the women's health clinics? Do they not understand that our loss of humanity begins at any point where we insert ourselves into the life chain?

Yes, there are potential wonderful life-saving procedures looming in the future. But are they worth the price of our humanity? Is it right that some can live enriched, extended lives because they are rich enough to afford the byproducts of the demise of other human beings?

Even for those who do not believe in a higher power, do they not have higher principles? Do they really wish to live in this Brave New World of class distinctions based on scientific worthiness?

And for those who do believe in a higher power, how long do you think we will be allowed to continue down this headlong rush to that Brave New World?