you are not addressing his point, his point is about the law bing stupid and the judge following the law.
The ruling may be legitimate and the judge may be doing his job, but I still don't agree with his ruling.
The ruling says that stem cell research must not receive public funding because it involves destruction of human embryos.
What I'm addressing is the logistical problem and moral duplicity here.
Logistical problem: The embryos used in stem cell research exist with or without stem cell research, and will be destroyed with or without stem cell research. It is not logically sound argument to say that stem cell research is responsible for their destruction.
Which leads us to moral duplicity of turning a blind eye over fertility clinics that produce said surplus of human embryos in the first place.
Is there a ruling that says fertility clinics using in vitro fertilization must not receive public funding?
I would actually support the judge's ruling if he looked underneath the underneath and decreed that if stem cell research can't have public funding, neither can fertility clinics that produce the embryos in the first place.
I would actually
love to see what the so-called "Pro Life" block would think of
that.
"Okay, I'll ban public funding for stem cell research because embryos are destroyed in the process."
"Whee! Praise the Lord!"
"...of course, by the same standards I'm also going to ban public funding for in vitro fertilization that produces the vast majority of these embryos in the first place. Have fun explaining to childless families why it is bad for them to have children. I guess God doesn't want them to have kids..."
"Gently Caress"
And yeah, I'm criticizing the judge for not using common sense and the law makers for creating an absurd law that doesn't hold water with any sort of logic, it just appeases the so-called "pro-life" block.
My point is pretty much that the Judiciary's job is to uphold the law, even dumb ones. That's their job.
I'm not as familiar with legal procedures as I would like to be: it's got to be possible to appeal on more than just procedural error, though. Can't you appeal on the basis that a higher law (administered by a higher court) supersedes the ruling?
Don't know about the law, but I do know that it's not logically sound to put the blame of the destruction of those embryos on stem cell research.
Can someone find out some actual data whether or not
a. fertility clinics using in vitro fertilization receive public funding
and
b. if there is a ruling that they
cannot receive public funding?