gl.

 

by month:
* March 2002
* April 2002
* May 2002
* June 2002
* July 2002
* August 2002
* September 2002
* October 2002
* November 2002
* December 2002
* January 2003
* February 2003
* March 2003
* April 2003
* May 2003
* June 2003
* July 2003
* August 2003
* September 2003
* October 2003
* November 2003
* December 2003
* January 2004
* February 2004
* March 2004
* April 2004
* May 2004
* June 2004
* July 2004
* August 2004
* September 2004
* October 2004
* November 2004
* December 2004
* January 2005
* February 2005
* March 2005
* April 2005
* May 2005
* June 2005
* July 2005
* August 2005
* September 2005
* October 2005
* November 2005
* December 2005
* January 2006
* February 2006
* March 2006
* April 2006
* May 2006
* June 2006
* July 2006
* August 2006
* September 2006
* October 2006
* November 2006
* December 2006
* January 2007
* February 2007
* March 2007
* April 2007
* May 2007
* June 2007
* July 2007
* August 2007
* September 2007
* October 2007
* November 2007
* December 2007
* January 2008
* February 2008
* March 2008
* April 2008
* May 2008
* June 2008
* July 2008
* August 2008
* September 2008
* October 2008
* November 2008
* December 2008
* January 2009
* February 2009
* March 2009
* April 2009
* May 2009
* June 2009
* August 2009
* September 2009
* December 2009
* January 2010
* February 2010
* March 2010
* April 2010
* May 2010
* June 2010
* August 2010
* October 2010
* November 2010
* March 2011
* June 2012
* July 2012
* August 2012
* September 2012
* October 2012
* November 2012
* December 2012
* January 2013
* February 2013
* March 2013
* April 2013
* May 2013
* June 2013
* July 2013
* August 2013
* September 2013
* April 2014
* August 2014
* November 2014
* December 2014
* January 2015
* March 2015

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?
site feed by atom

Saturday, March 18, 2006

 
[#] [2]
argh. see, this is what i mean:

in this article about embryo donation vs embryo adoption, the only thing that's changed is the wording, specifically designed to condition an emotional response. as george lakoff would undoubtably agree, words make a big difference in framing a response, in part by requiring a defense that seems unreasonable. the differences are always innocuous, but it's like advertising: millions of dollars have been silently sifted into making something invisible.

so just to be clear, only birth makes embryos into people. they're not even fetuses yet. as embryos, we share the same development as chickens: can you tell the difference?

Comments:
Argh! I hadn't heard about that spin-doctoring attempt yet. Grrrr.....

The Exploratorium link that has you try to guess which blob of cells is human, by the way: excellent!
 
yeah, the article was published in december, but i stumbled across it accidentally friday. and then when i went back to it today, i only got the first 50 words! argh! so here it is in full:

Embryo Adoption
By SARAH BLUSTAIN
Published: December 11, 2005

This year, opponents of abortion stepped up their use of a carefully chosen phrase - "embryo adoption" - that describes a couples' decision to have a baby using the embryos of another couple.

The less loaded term for embryo adoption is "embryo donation." It typically signifies that a couple who have undergone in vitro fertilization, and have had as many children as they wish to, are releasing their leftover embryos for use by other would-be parents. Of some 400,000 frozen embryos in the country, according to the RAND Corporation, about 9,000 are designated for other families. (Another 11,000 are designated for research, while the balance remain unused in freezers.)

Medically, embryo adoption and embryo donation are identical. But to promoters of embryo adoption, which term you use makes all the difference: "We would like for embryos to be recognized as human life and therefore to be adopted as opposed to treated as property," explains Kathryn Deiters, director of development at the Nightlight Christian Adoptions agency, in California, which has been offering embryo adoptions since the late 1990's. Nightlight also favors the term "snowflakes." As the agency's executive director, Ron Stoddart, told The Washington Times: "Like snowflakes, these embryos are unique, they're fragile and, of course, they're frozen.. . .It's a perfect analogy."

In May, President Bush delighted the Nightlight agency when he met with some of its young success stories, who wore "Former Embryo" stickers on their chests. He used the occasion to stress his opposition to legislation supporting wider stem-cell research with embryos.

The number of snowflake babies so far is small. But liberating the in vitro world's ice chests is only part of the movement's goals; raising consciousness is the rest. Advocates would like to see courts consider embryo-transfer disputes under adoption law rather than contract law, as now occurs. Making snowflakes subject to adoption law, it is hoped, would be an important symbolic step toward the movement's ultimate goal: granting embryos the rights of human beings.
 
Post a Comment