After Bush vetoed recent embryo-destroying stem cell research funding, various quarters predictably became unglued. Cries of "fundamentalism" and dire predictions of death and destruction became the norm in the mainstream media. For as much as those quarters claim to have the intellectually superior position on the issue, they only seem to be practicing politics by pejorative. Instead of attempting to deal intellectually with the issue, they deceive.

First, Bush's veto does nothing, absolutely nothing, to prevent embryo-destroying stem cell research. State funds, local funds and private funds can be used to fund this research. Bush's veto prevents federal funding for the research. That's it. For all the time some spent shaking their fists in self-righteous indignation, they could have worked a few more hours and sent the money to Merck to further their life-destroying research. There is a clear difference between not supporting and preventing something from occurring.

Second, there are many forms of stem cell research, and the embryo-destroying research is only one form of it. Only recently has the media realized that much misinformation has been accepted on the issue. Adult stem cells have produced cures. Stem cells from umbilical cord blood have produced cures. Embryo-destroying stem cells have produced no such advances. As a result, private money is forthcoming in unimaginable amounts for adult stem cell and other viable stem cell research. It is the embryo-destroying research community that is begging for federal funds because no intelligent funding source sees viability in the research. That is why this fight is occurring over embryo-destroying research, not because there is some conservative plot to kill off everyone by denying medical research.

Third, those who claim that embryo-destroying stem cell research could produce valuable cures are largely ignoring the real debate and pretending it doesn't exist. The question is not what the results could potentially be, but whether the means justify the end. Some sciences, for their part, almost stubbornly refuse to integrate any real moral or ethical calculus into their research. Some adamantly refuse to have any a prior restrictions on their work, even if it involves destroying life. Sure, embryo-destroying stem cell research could produce cures, much like Nazi human experimentation could have produced valuable advances in medicine, but at what cost? Do we, as a society, want to be in the business of growing embryos to harvest them for parts for the "more valuable" members of society?

It is long past time to push through the extremist rhetoric and deal intelligently with this issue. No real political discussion can take place when knee-jerk reactionaries emerge from the fever swamps and take to the airwaves to impugn the motives and character of all who do not conform to some prefabricated political thought. There are ethical alternatives that are producing results with stem cell research. There are serious ethical and moral concerns about life-destroying stem cell research. Much can be said about Bush's first use of the veto, but temper tantrums do little to advance the debate.