8/4/2015, 4:27 pm
Over half a century ago, during their trials in the courtrooms of Nuremberg, Germany, Nazi scientists recounted their roles in conducting all sorts of medical experiments on their unwilling human captives. These scientists viewed their work as beneficial to humanity, considering the lives they took a small price to pay for the advancement of medicine.
Some in the medical community were appalled by the way in which the medical data were collected by the Nazis and refused to use the findings to further their own research. Still others, like Kristine Moe, who wrote a 1984 Hastings Center Report, in which she argued that since we could do nothing to reverse the unethical way in which the data were collected, we may as well get what we can from it:
"Nor, however, should we let the inhumanity of such experiments blind us to the possibility that some "good" may be salvaged from the ashes."
Similarly, Dr. John Hayward, a biology professor at Victoria University in Vancouver, Canada, was quoted in the same essay, saying:
"I don't want to have to use the Nazi data, but there is no other and will be no other in an ethical world. I've rationalized it a bit. But not to use it would be equally bad. I'm trying to make something constructive out of it. I use it with my guard up, but it's useful." [emphasis added]
These Nazi experiments have been characterized by most scholars and researchers as atrocities, and have been widely condemned. However, Big Baby™ (Planned Parenthood, StemExpress, et. al.) and their advocates in the Democrat Party are using the same rationale to justify their government-funded slaughter and sale of human fetal tissue for medical research as a net benefit to mankind.
Rationalizations for using the results of Nazi experiments on humans for the benefit of society were spoken of in the past tense, as if to say "Never Again" to taking human life for the advancement of medicine. They were viewed as something evil that could never again find justification in an "ethical world"...
Perhaps these scientists underestimated the progressive nature of the modern political consensus. "Never Again" has since been replaced by Safe, Legal, and Rare™. So let the experiments continue unabated comrades. Sacrificing today's "burdens" will ensure the promise that Next Tuesday™ will be a much more glorious future indeed.
Some in the medical community were appalled by the way in which the medical data were collected by the Nazis and refused to use the findings to further their own research. Still others, like Kristine Moe, who wrote a 1984 Hastings Center Report, in which she argued that since we could do nothing to reverse the unethical way in which the data were collected, we may as well get what we can from it:
Rationalizations for using the results of Nazi experiments on humans for the benefit of society were spoken of in the past tense, as if to say "Never Again" to taking human life for the advancement of medicine. They were viewed as something evil that could never again find justification in an "ethical world"...
Perhaps these scientists underestimated the progressive nature of the modern political consensus. "Never Again" has since been replaced by Safe, Legal, and Rare™. So let the experiments continue unabated comrades. Sacrificing today's "burdens" will ensure the promise that Next Tuesday™ will be a much more glorious future indeed.