Childhood Heroes Collide

In Ohio, my home state, a critical senate electoral crusade has taken shape between Mike DeWine and Sherrod Brown. On the sidelines, two of my childhood heroes – Bernie Kosar and Michael J. Fox – were endorsing the candidates.

Former Cleveland Browns quarterback Bernie Kosar, a future Hall of Famer, has endorsed Mike DeWine. Kosar is one of the most beloved athletes in the history of Cleveland. DeWine’s efforts to keep the Browns in Cleveland was the highlight of his radio ad, which applauded DeWine’s bipartisanship. While DeWine is a strong social conservative on key issues, he has crossed party lines on gun control, guest worker programs, and border security.

According to News Meat, Kosar has a record of making contributions to help elect Republicans. The source indicates that he’s given $82,200 towards Republican campaigns. Needless to say, Kosar “swings both ways.” Kosar joined an odd pack of Democrat Ron Klein’s contributors, which included Rosie O'Donnell, Barbra Streisand, and Andrew Tobias.

Sherrod Brown has campaigned on "safe" issues, like health care, and has portrayed the DeWine campaign as desparate, smeary, and distortive. It was nice to see this ad for a change, regarding DeWine's campaign, which has also relied on negative advertising for the most part.



Not surprisingly, actor Michael J. Fox has advocated for embryonic stem-cell research, which has been suggested to treat Parkinson’s disease. He has been a vocal supporter for Sherrod Brown. Headlines were made after Fox made an ad in support for Claire McCaskill in Missouri. Rush Limbaugh was quick to suggest that Fox’s evident symptoms were a result of avoiding his medication.

Fox's condition is devastating for a lifetime Back to the Future fan to watch.




Rush could have focused on this potentially misleading comment instead – “Unfortunately, Sen. Jim Talent opposes expanding stem cell research… Senator Talent even wanted to criminalize the science that gives us a chance for hope.” Even a “progressive” columnist agrees that the remark was misleading. The columnist admits, “…it is true that James Talent has never actively attempted to criminalize stem cell research.”

In an interview with Katie Couric, Fox said, "The irony is that I was too medicated. I was dyskinesic." Fox has also crossed party lines, endorsing Republicans like Arlen Specter and Mike Castle, who have supported embryonic stem-cell research. If I was suffering from Parkinson's to the point where I couldn't talk without my medication, I too, would do anything to get a cure.

In response to Fox's ad, a handful of celebrities - Jim Caviezel, Jeff Suppan, Patricia Heaton, Kurt Warner, and Mike Sweeney made an ad opposing Missouri's Amendment 2.



Mike DeWine has long advocated on a pro-life platform, while Sherrod Brown, while less vocal on life and death issues, had attempted to block a ban on partial-birth abortion. DeWine is also opposed to federal funding in support for embryonic stem-cell research. "I am against taking federal dollars to destroy human life," he contends.

The question raised over the stem-cell issue is whether it demeans the pro-life cause more than it promotes it. In principle, most conservatives believe that life begins at conception, making the stem-cell debate valid amongst fellow conservatives. However, if there is potential after all to cure Parkinson’s disease, diabetes, and spinal cord injuries, it could very well be the pro-life thing to do.

"The hottest place in Hell is reserved for those who remain neutral in times of great moral conflict," Martin Luther King, Jr. has suggested. At the risk of abandoning the reasoning behind this quote I endorse on many issues, I consider myself "cautiously neutral" on embryonic stem-cell research. While a well-informed population should always take sides, we often do so long before the facts come out.

Senator Chuck Schumer is also campaigning for Sherrod Brown, although they have divergent views on our national security. Schumer has supported the Patriot Act, while Brown has opposed it. Anyways, Schumer had this to say about the opponents of embryonic stem-cell research:

“The trouble with this group, which I call the theocrats, is they want their faith to dictate what the government does. That, in a word, is un-American. That is exactly what the Founding Fathers put down their plows and took up muskets to fight.”

Schumer isn’t the most persuasive campaigner, but he may have a point. Filter out his trash-talk, like “theocrats” and “un-American” as he frequently describes anyone who even smells conservative. Those terms serve as a distraction to the real issue at hand. We can admire the fact that faith-based politicians have a sense of accountability, and still contend that faith-based policies deserve the same skepticism that any other policy should face.

I agree that we must use our conscience in the field of scientific advancement, which has crossed the line in the cases of Josef Mengele’s experiments with exterminated Jews in Nazi Germany, the horrific procedure of partial-birth abortion, and San Francisco’s tax-funded sex-change operations. It is fool-hearted to assume that modern science is somehow infallible, and that no ethical boundaries should exist. We have an obligation, if not to God, than to each other, to draw a line.

A line is crossed when human beings are treated like laboratory rats, while some would still consider it immoral to conduct scientific experiments on animals. In Vogue magazine, Ingrid Newkirk, the president of PETA proclaimed, “Even if animal research resulted in a cure for AIDS, we’d be against it.” They aren’t nicknamed “People for the Unethical Treatment of Humans” for nothing.

Yet, I find the opponents of embryonic stem-cell research to be a losing issue for many reasons. They have tried time and again to turn the subject into an abortion debate. While the subject of frozen embryos is rightfully a disturbing topic, you have to wonder exactly when a fertilized human being can feel pain, especially if they are frozen.

Lack of evidence in support for theoretical cures is another grave concern. Would it make sense to pursue embryonic stem-cell research without hard evidence, proving embryonic stem-cells to deliver on its promises? Many countries in Asia and Europe have contributed federal funding for embryonic stem-cell research, and have delivered no promises from it so far.

Sometimes, the best solution isn’t the most sensitive solution. I say that because this will sound radical at first glance. I find it hard to support the idea of in vitro fertilization to begin with, due to the fact that child abuse, neglect, and abandonment tend to escape the minds of infertile couples. In other words, couples incapable of having children on their own should be encouraged to adopt an unwanted child who has already been born.

In a perfect world, there would be no infertility, or child abandonment. But to make ends meet, people will have to compromise their own self-interests and contribute something to society, given the fact that they want to raise children. While it may force you to compromise, it’s a far more compassionate effort to make every child a wanted child.