Murder better than research
Let me get this straight. The federal government won?t fund stem cell research because, the logic goes, it will kill some tiny organism on a petri dish.
Never mind the organism, the first form of life, would be destroyed anyway because the government can?t store all of them. Let?s just literally throw the stem cells in the trash ? but not conduct research ? because of the sanctity of life.
I?ll play along and buy into this theory and pray no one I know would ever benefit from stem cell research. If our government believes performing research on these organisms is morally wrong, no matter the potential benefit, I?ll wear a happy face (at least for the opening paragraphs of this column).
Keep those thoughts in mind when I tell you our government, our judicial system, says that drowning five children in a bathtub is not murder. That?s exactly the verdict a Texas jury rendered Wednesday when Andrea Yates was found not guilty ? yes I said not guilty ? of murdering her five children all under age 8.
The message I?m receiving is clear: We place more value on a micro-organism than a living, breathing, giggling child.
It?s better for a tiny cell to survive than someone?s own mother, who could one day be saved by stem cell research.
For an encore, a jury rules it?s not murder when Yates kills her five children. Said defense attorney Wendell Odom, ?It?s this simple: This lady never did anything, anything wrong in her whole life. She?s mentally ill. She wakes up one morning. She drowns her five kids. Come on ? we all know she?s insane, and it?s a shame that it took us this long to finally get the right verdict.?
Is any criminal in his or her right mind when they commit a crime? Is anybody really thinking clearly when they rob a store, or shoot a co-worker, or kill their spouse?
The answer is no. If they were thinking clearly ? and valued what is right and wrong ? they wouldn?t have done it.
This great nation is hurting itself by trying to overthink obvious situations. Instead of embracing stem cell research that could help a person with Alzheimer?s or Parkinson?s disease, we?re launching a philosophical debate about morality. I say conduct the stem cell research and save the philosophy for some college class.
Instead of finding a woman guilty of murdering her five children, including one she had to chase down, we debate her mental wellness at the time of the crime. I don?t need a psychologist with a doctorate degree to tell me Andrea Yates was not mentally stable. But nothing ? absolutely nothing ? can mitigate her behavior. She should be put to death.
But here?s the part of the defense attorney?s comment that really makes me cringe: ?This lady never did anything, anything wrong in her whole life.? Is that suddenly a legitimate defense? Is it OK for every American who has a clean criminal record to commit murder?
It must be. Based on what I?m hearing, if you?re middle-aged and arrest-free, you have the green light to do anything. If you get caught with the smoking gun in your hand just claim you were temporarily insane. If this strategy works for Mary Winkler, I take back my comments about the United States having the best legal system in the world.
So once again, let me see if I have this straight. Killing five children is not murder. But conducting life-saving research on a micro-organism is so horrid our government cannot possible endorse it.
All in the name of progress.
James Clark is editor of the Standard. He can be reached at 473-2191 or by e-mail at [email protected].