James Stabile Informational Newsletter

 June 2005

Religion and Spiritualism...

Let's talk about the stem cell controversy. Yes, it is a political issue in the United States. However, should it be a political issue? I think not. The government should not play God in this or any other religious based issue. As President Reagan said so eloquently, "there they go again". Can't you just hear President Reagan's voice saying those memorable words. President Reagan is an American icon. Regardless of his conservative politics, he was a great American. I'm getting off task here, but Ronald Reagan was also a man of God. As his son Ron Jr. said in the eulogy he gave for his father, Ronald Reagan did not wear his religion on his sleeve. Ronald Reagan knew the meaning of the separation of church and state. He did follow Jesus Christ's comment, "Give to Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's." I got a little misty eyed when reminiscing about President Reagan. Back to Reagan's famous quote, "there they go again." The Bush administration is running the country under the pretense of a faith based model. Actually, the Bush administration is using religion in order to sell it's bag of goods to the American people. That is the meaning of a false prophet. The Word of God is being used to seduce an ignorant, weak and uninformed electorate to accept and promote the agenda of the conservative right. That may be true, but what about the stem cell controversy.

President Bush says that he will veto any bill that destroys life to give life. What does he think he and his administration are doing with the lives of the people in Iraq. What does he think he is doing with the lives of the poor, the homeless, the uneducated, the sick, the least of my brethren right here in the United States. Hypocrisy, deceit, self-righteousness all in the name of faith. What a crock. It's all being done in the name of success, monetary wealth and the betterment of those in power. But wait now, what about the stem cell controversy?

The answer to the previous question - I don't know. I am stumped by that one. I can appreciate medical research. I can appreciate extending someone's life. I can appreciate curing the sick. But I don't know if I can appreciate doing these things by destroying the very foundation, the unique building blocks of life.

The answer to the question, "When does life begin?" is paramount in my decision to support or not support embryonic stem cell research. It is of the utmost importance in any decisions that I may make concerning any practice that involves fertilization, embryonic manipulation or embryonic destruction. If life begins when the unborn baby is delivered during the birth process, then fertilization and embryonic experimentation is not a problem for me and I would totally support it. If live begins at conception, then I would not support any artificial means of fertilization or any embryonic experimentation. 

At this point I must clarify a point concerning the beginning of life. By the beginning of life, I am referring to the moment that the immortal soul (the part of our existence that makes us God-like and children of God) enters the physical body of the person. To rephrase my original question, does the immortal soul enter the individual's body or collection of cells, at fertilization or at the time of birth? Succinctly, that is the question.

Each person must answer that beginning of life question for himself or herself. More importantly, once a person adopts a premise concerning the commencement of human life (conception or birth), he or she must make life decisions based on the rational consequences of that premise. In other words, decisions made by an individual must be congruent with his or her basic premise concerning the beginning of human life. Decisions and practices must not be of the cafeteria nature. Consistency and correlation to the original premise concerning the person's answer to the question, "When does life begin" must be reflected in all decisions that person makes concerning relevant life issues. 

The beginning of life question will not be answered completed in our human lifetime, maybe in the next. For that reason, there is no complete answer to the question. I think each person must answer the question for himself or herself based on his or her own religious, ethical and personal belief system. There is no right or wrong answer to this mind boggling dilemma. 

One thing is for sure, the government should stay out of the issue. Laws should not be passed in approval or disapproval of situations involving these beginning of life issues. Questions concerning abortion, stem cell research, fertilization or embryonic development must not be legislated by the government. The only legislation that should be approved is that every American has the right to his or her opinion on these issues.

In short, these life issues should be in the domain of the medical world. Americans must be free to explore, develop and maintain their beliefs and practices on such issues. Above all, no person, organization or governmental agency should violate any American's constitutional rights to his or her opinions on these life issues. 

It seems to me that this same type of argument can be made concerning the end of human life issues. This, too, is a medical question. Each person has the right to view these end of life issues in the same way as they view the beginning of life issues. These are personal, freedom of choice issues reserved to the individual's own religious, spiritual and ethical views.

No government or religious group has the power to regulate a persons free will concerning these life issues. The rights of the individual must be validated and enforced. Each person is accountable for his or her beliefs and actions. In the end it is the individual who will meet God and justify his or her beliefs and actions in this human life.

Did you see the article in the paper or the segment of the TV news that talked about the intolerant Roman Catholic clergy withholding communion from politicians who believe in the woman's right to choose? Or did you read about those same intolerant clergy withholding communion form openly gay or lesbian individuals. Now, is that love? Is that embracing and respecting life? What a bunch of egocentric, holier than thou, hypocritical, misguided people - the clergy and those who profess to be the defenders of life. My God would never withhold His love or support from any group of people. My God loves, values and respects all human beings. These are just more examples of why I have a genuine distrust and disrespect for those people, clergy or not, who think they are the owners and controllers of the Word of God. I pray for them.

June 2005 Newsletter  
Discussion of the Month     Entertainment     Health, Fitness and Lifestyle     Politics
 Religion and Spiritualism     Technology and Business     Too Strange, Weird or Just Funny