novus•lumen

I realize I just posted something no more than 4 hours ago, but I just finished reading a section of the Washington Posts editorial page that sparked some thoughts that I must write down, regardless if anyone reads them or not!

I picked up today’s Washington Post for a mid-afternoon read, and ended up in the editorial section. In the Post’s editorial page, the board reacted to some of Majority Leader Tom DeLay’s remarks during the House debate before yesterday’s stem cell vote. DeLay said the members were voting, “to fund, with taxpayer dollars the dismemberment of living, distinct human beings for the purpose of medical experimentation.” The Post obviously reacted to this description, saying “describing stem cell research as dismembering human beings conjures politically useful images of a grisly, abortion-like procedure in which an unborn baby gets torn apart.” They then make several points: obviously there is nothing to tear apart, the embryo is 5 days old; the logical conclusions of stem cell debate should call for a ban of in vitro fertilization; in vitro produces way more embryos than are needed for pregnancy; in 2002, there were 400,000 frozen embryos across the country; this procedure and storage is commonplace and accepted because few people regard a group of cells that small as the moral equivalent of a human being.

Then, a piece by Richard Cohen called “Life vs. Life” sparked some unsettling novus questions and thoughts. Among many other things, he says: “I have no idea if the fertilized egg that does not adhere has a soul or if the soul only comes when the egg adheres-or if there is no such thing as the soul…” For a quick review of the process of conception (I had to google this by the way…): when the sperm makes contact with the egg, it becomes fertilized (ie an embryo), but still might not develop if the embryo does not “adhere” or stick to the womb. Cohen makes uses of this example from nature to indict right-wingers for being inconsistent, because what happens then to these non-adhering embryos? What is the difference between these non-adhering embryos and those frozen or discarded in a fertility clinic or lab? You have to admit, he makes a fairly valid point.

Without coming to any conclusions about whether Cohen is on to something or a nutcase secularist, both pieces have sparked some novus questions: When does a developing person (ie a baby in the womb) “receive” a soul? Is that soul fallen? Is it fundamentally sinful? If so, are aborted or miscarried developing persons in the womb sent to hell? Are these 400,000 embryos in “limbo”? Do they have a soul, a sinful, hell-destined soul at that? If all these questions have a YES answer, does this reflect the heart of God? Is that just? Also, what does Scripture say? I can only think of the typical Psalm 139.

Anyway, these thoughts are too disturbing to leave without answers. And my fundamentalist, evangelical cliches leave me wanting…What do you think?

-jeremy

Popularity: 1% [?]