BEWARE - CONTROVERSIAL SUBJECTS

I'm going to be writing about two rather controversial subjects which are probably not related to each other, but which are in the forefront of my life right now.

The first subject has to do with EMBRYONIC stem cell research. As you know, today President Bush vetoed the bill which supported this kind of research. As he said, "If this bill were to become law, American taxpayers would, for the first time in our history, be compelled to fund the deliberate destruction of human embryos, and I'm not going to allow it." He believes, as do I, that embroyos are the beginnings of human lives, and as such, they should be protected from death. Pure and simple. (BTW, The Anchoress has an excellent article on this subject - check it out at www.theanchoressonline.com .)

I would like to share with you that my oldest sister has Parkinson's disease. This subject is one which we can't discuss because we see this so differently. She believes that this kind of research is necessary in order to find treatments and/or a cure for her disease. What she doesn't realize is that research being done with adult stem cells is far more promising and is yielding impressive results.

My oldest daughter, TP, has chronic lupus nephritis. A few months ago, we were discussing this topic in light of the new treatments for lupus, and I explained to her how her aunt felt about this. TP stared at me with a horrified look in her eyes and said, "Mom, I could never live with myself, knowing that another human being died so that I could live". This, from a woman-child who faces a future in which flare-ups will occur, and who will always need to be vigilant about medications and blood-draws to see if the lupus is still in remission. I know part of her opinion on embryonic stem-cell research also has to do with the fact that she is adopted - and she was given the chance to live rather than be aborted. So, she identifies with the possible destruction of those embryos because that possibility could have been a reality for her 18 years ago.

The other issue I want to bring up is medical records for adopted children.

Last week, TP was featured in a local newspaper article about being stricken with lupus in her sophomore year, and how she went about tackling the illness while still maintaining a 4.0 GPA and being involved in many activities. The article discussed how this disease strengthened TP's faith in God, and how it helped her make the decision to become a nurse. The reporter was an intern from a local university. One of the questions she had for me was "Do you think that if you had TP's medical records, it would have made a difference"?

Oh, please. . .

I can see the makings of a wonderful MSM reporter. To me, this was so TOTALLY irrelevant to the story! And, I basically told the reporter that! I told her that even if we had all of TP's medical records, it still, in no way, would have prevented the disease from occurring. I even asked her to not put that question in the article, but she went ahead and did it anyway. It was obvious it was HER agenda to bring up this particular topic. I'm now debating whether or not to say anything to the editor of the paper, as there were several other mistakes (quoting us incorrectly, leaving DQ out of the story) in the article as well.

What are your thoughts?