Lies, Deceptions and Doublespeak
The term "therapeutic cloning" is an example of "newspeak," the art defined in George Orwell's 1984 as obscuring or reversing the truth through the manipulation of words. The term "therapeutic cloning" was first popularized by the British government as a means of reassuring the public that they would be protected from clones walking the streets by a ban on "reproductive cloning," while experimental "therapeutic" cloning could proceed.
But exactly for whom is this scientific research "therapeutic?" Not for the cloned human embryo. Not for the donor of the genes that are cloned. Not for anyone. No, the word "therapeutic" is simply being attached to this dead-end cloning to suggest that this research has some imminent medical value. If fact, any potential therapies that may be developed are at this stage purely hypothetical.
A law proposed by eugenicists and biotech firms which would require all human clones to be destroyed before a certain stage of development. Fake cloning bans specifically guarantee a right to clone provided the clone is not allowed to ever walk the streets. Furthermore, many fake cloning bans leave room for implanting a genetically-altered embryo because it is no longer a perfect copy of the genotype upon which it is based, and is therefore not technically a clone.
Eugenicists like to support fake cloning bans in order to calm public concerns about cloning. In fact, these laws actually guarantee the eugenicists a right to perfect the technique of inserting genes, including altered genes, into a human cell that is then triggered to form a human embryo. Perfection of this technique is critical to the long-range goal of creating genetically modified human beings.
A fancy way of describing the technology used to clone Dolly the sheep, invented to avoid the word "cloning" for fear that the common person may object to the cloning of human embryos for destructive experiments in embryology and human engineering. More doublespeak to distract the public from what is really going on in the laboratories of eugenicists, transhumanists, and atheists who deny that any innate dignity attaches to human life. If all life is meaningless, including human life, why shouldn't they have as much right to create and destroy human embryos as they do mouse embryos? This quite rational opinion, if you accept their premise, is also why they justify deceiving the "ignorant" public, which is still deeply infected with "irrational" religious beliefs.
Okay, they don't really word it that way. Such wording violates the rules of doublespeak, which require that the plain facts must be obscured or worded in ways that imply the opposite of the truth.
However it is worded, advocates of destructive embryo experiments are raising the argument that destroying little human lives is worth it, because of all the potential cures that may come from this "little" moral lapse.
But here are the facts:
- Experiments and therapies using stem cells drawn from adult tissue have proven to be extremely successful. Two key advantages of using adult stem cells are (a) you have no tissue rejection issues when the stem cells are from the patient being treated, and (b) the mature stem cells are easier to control—they do what you expect them to do.
- Experiments using human embryonic stem cells have not been successful because of (a) tissue rejection issues and (b) the tendency for embryonic stem cells to want to develop into a complete embryo with all tissue types, not just the one needed for a particular cure.
- It is possible to do experiments with animal embryonic stem cells to determine possible therapies, but eugenicists want to skip this step because they want to set the precedent that human life in the embryonic stage can be treated like disposable tissue.
- There is not a single "potential cure" from human embryo farming that cannot be pursued with equal or greater likelihood of success using stem cells from adults or umbilical cord blood.
- There is not a single pivotal line of research in the area of understanding human embryos that cannot be pursued using animal embryos. After all, if we are 99.9% identical to apes, why can't we develop new treatments with 99.9% accuracy on ape embryos?
- The hype about potential cures from embryo research is just a red herring to distract us from putting meaningful limitations on human embryo research.
- Eugenicists and transhumanists are ready to embrace a ban on "reproductive cloning," as long as we guarantee a right to clone-to-kill experiments. That exception is all they need perfect their laboratory skills to the point where they can alter human embryos into "better human life forms."
- The real issue at stake is whether or not scientists and entrepreneurs should have the right to wrest the human genome from "blind evolutionary forces" so they can "intelligently design" humanity's biological future according to their own visions of what humanity should be. If they can make money from government grants and patents on human biology, all the better.