From The Desk Of Pastor Paul Viggiano

Bush's stem cell veto no surprise

You may argue with the president's line of reasoning on when human life begins. But it is consistent and Americans voted for him on right to life issues.

By Paul Viggiano

Delivered in Jeff Goldblum's inimitable style, the line castigating the scientists was, "They were so concerned with if they could do it, they never stopped to ask if they should do it." The next thing you know, the T. rex is eating the lawyer right off the toilet.

We laud those who dare ask such questions of certain types of progress. Yet our president has fallen under a guillotine of accusations for having the audacity to disagree with the ethics of stem cell research. Scenarios are fabricated where, in the generations to come, the arrogance of his decision will prove disastrous -- perhaps for his own offspring.

Will history vindicate the anti-Bush rhetoric? Will time vilify this president for this veto? I always find it interesting when people call upon quantum leaps to justify their position. When God rolls the videotape of history, will the one person healed justify the 10,000 sacrifices for the remedy? Play Stalin's tape "One death is a tragedy; a million is a statistic."

Good thing embryos don't have mouths yet. And of course if you don't have a mouth, you certainly have no soul. And you also can't vote, so I'm not sure how this decision was politically expeditious for Bush.

Bush was accused of being cruel for defending the mouthless; cruel to future generations who, perhaps, would have benefited by their involuntary donation of their three score and 10. He was also accused of hypocrisy because of his lack of outrage at all the embryos destroyed in fertility clinics throughout the land.

Where's Spock (or Data for the "Next Generation") when you need him? What kind of logic is this? How do we know that Bush has no outrage? There are numerous things that erupt or burp outrage in my heart. My first priority is to fight the battles I think I can win; battles are fought in increments.

I voted for Bush because he shares my world view. (At least he was closer than Al Gore.) I must say that this veto was the least hypocritical presidential movement I've yet to observe him make. We have a representative form of government. We vote for people who most closely mirror our views. We voted for a president who views embryos as human beings. This was not hidden from the voters. He has now made a decision consistent with how he billed himself; how is this hypocrisy?

It's been said that Bush is trying to make this an abortion issue. I'm still scratching my almost-hairless head. I'm going to try to take responsibility for making this clear.

There are certain things in this crazy old world that cannot be empirically (scientifically) proved. Einstein said that we learn nothing from science -- it merely teaches us how to organize things we observe.

Science cannot teach us when life actually begins; it was a beating heart, then brain-waves, who knows what's next? They are all arbitrary lines in the sand. Science cannot teach us that it is wrong to take innocent lives. These are immaterial and abstract concepts.

Anyone who has an opinion regarding when life begins or that it is wrong to kill the innocent, has that opinion based upon unprovable, immaterial assumptions. This is not a faith-versus-fact issue. In a godless universe, one cannot factually state when life begins or that murder is wrong -- it's merely an opinion. I state this to head off at the pass those who thoughtlessly trumpet their "Keep your faith out of politics oratories." It is your immaterial faith or conviction that informs your opinion that my faith has no place in politics, and I don't see why your immaterial convictions trump my own.

We still live in a country where a candidate for president has no chance of winning without a profession of Christian faith. Biblical Christians hold a basic presupposition that the Bible is true in all it teaches. The Bible makes no distinction between the born and unborn baby; the Greek word for baby used to describe John the Baptist and Jesus before they were born is the same word used to describe the baby Jesus wrapped in swaddling cloths.

Hypocrisy lies in those who make a public profession of faith and then exercise their powers in a manner inconsistent with the world view they held before the constituency. You may disagree with Bush, but in this decision his operations were quite consistent with his profession of biblical Christianity. And that is who we voted for.