Snowflakes (see New York Times, June 2, 2005) - children who have developed out of embryos that otherwise would have been destroyed or discarded at fertility clinics- bring new energy to the question: What to do with such embryos? Should they be used for stem cell research that might lead to cures for diseases that cripple millions now and threaten many more millions in the future? Or should they be saved from destruction (murder?) and be given the chance to develop as human beings as demonstrated by these Snowflakes? Two irrefutable goods stand in opposition to one another: the sanctity of all life versus the alleviation of disease and suffering.
The dilemma for us is: there is no clear cut, obviously correct answer to such questions, which never stops us from adopting (falling into) righteously anchored fixed positions. Having fixed positions - whether religiously or scientifically based - gets us off the hook of having to deal with the more difficult reality of uncertainty. Uncertainty can immobilize us, leaving us on the sidelines shaking our heads over the complexity of it all. But uncertainty need not,nor should not immobilize us. We still have choice, but now our choice, stripped of righteousness and surety is more complex: to accept the truth that the good we choose comes at the expense of the good we oppose.
Comments