NationStates Jolt Archive


Alan Keyes on the issues

Cryptic Nightmare
19-12-2007, 04:03
If we are enjoined to respect human life, then we must respect that life at every stage, from conception onward. If we do not, then we are basically saying that there is some criterion on which we can declare that some human beings deserve respect, and others do not. But doesn't that violate the principle of equality?

We say that all of us have equal rights that come from the hand of God. And yet we are willing to say that because a babe in the womb is not quite as well developed as we are, we can ignore the rights of that child.

No medical advance, and certainly no material profit, justifies denying the claim to humanity of the embryonic human person. Those who try to justify it are driven from one tortured rationalization to another, none addressing the real issue. Being undeveloped, unconscious, unattractive, small, or unwanted — these are not reasons that we accept in any other context for failing to respect the wholeness of moral worth that every human being has from his Creator.

Why, therefore, should we accept it in regard to embryonic research?

No — we do not have the right to take human life merely because it is unconscious, or because it is undeveloped or damaged, or for any other reason that tempts us to deny the equal dignity of all human persons.

When we start making such invidious distinctions, we destroy the principle of equal rights. We can't claim rights for ourselves if we deny those rights to babes at any stage in their development.

We ourselves don't want to be used as the basis for experiments without regard for our humanity — and neither should they.

The Declaration of Independence says we're all of us created equal. It doesn't make a distinction between whether that creation is published in the womb or in the petri dish. It just says that God's Will determines our dignity, not human action, not human intervention. In the forgetting of this principle, you open the door to a plethora of evils. In the remembering of it, you lay the solid foundation for further human progress — but in dignity and in decency and in honor.



Sounds like he is making an asinine rant. But I could be wrong, I still won't vote for anybody against stem cell research.
New Genoa
19-12-2007, 04:06
Alan Keyes is a lunatic. Look him up on ontheissues.org and commence laughing your ass off.

Also, what makes that quote even richer is that Keyes is pro-death penalty. Don't you love it when right-wingers wax poetically about respect for life while supporting the death penalty. It always gives me a giggle.
Cryptic Nightmare
19-12-2007, 04:10
Alan Keyes is a lunatic. Look him up on ontheissues.org and commence laughing your ass off.

Also, what makes that quote even richer is that Keyes is pro-death penalty. Don't you love it when right-wingers wax poetically about respect for life while supporting the death penalty. It always gives me a giggle.


I get enough of a laugh just looking at his site. But I will check out the one you posted..Which I think I have.
Venndee
19-12-2007, 04:31
I oppose federal funding for stem cell research, among federal funding for other things. I think that the publication/citation regime of free exchange of knowledge is sufficient for technological advancement without the intervention of the state.

As to the 'right-to-life' bit, I won't comment as that topic has a disturbing tendency of degenerating into hysteria.*

Edit: *This goes for both sides of the 'mainstream.'
Lunatic Goofballs
19-12-2007, 08:42
I liked him in 'Borat' though. :)
The Brevious
19-12-2007, 08:51
I liked him in 'Borat' though. :)

... AND the ThinkFilm, F**K!

Yeah, and we're not going to fall for a banana in the tailpipe.
Observers: [Mocking him] "You're not going to fall for the banana in the tailpipe"? It should be more natural, brother. It shouldflow out, like this - "Look, man, I ain't fallin' for no banana in my tailpipe!"