Originally published September 6 2015
Why do people who oppose product testing on animals think it's okay to use aborted baby parts for scientific research?
by J. D. Heyes
(NaturalNews) For years, Democrats in office and those running for office have attempted to curry favor with their liberal base by opposing any and all research that involved the use and resultant death of any animals, even those that were bred specifically to be used in research.
Way back in 1992, then-Democratic Rep. Ron Dellums called for a ban on the use of animals for military research.
Democratic presidential contender and former Arkansas Gov. Bill Clinton, who was not widely known outside of his home state at the time, made a similar plea. In a letter dated March 26, 1992, Presidential candidate Bill Clinton wrote to Don A. Jones of Marietta, GA: "Thank you for writing to express your concern for the rights of animals. I have always loved and respected animals and abhorred any cruelty toward them. Please be assured that a Clinton Administration would be extremely sensitive to these issues and concerns."
In an October 6 letter from that same year, Rep. Pete Stark voiced his support for H.R. 3918, the Consumer Products Safe Testing Act.
"Animals should be treated humanely," Stark once wrote. "As I was in the last Congress, I am a co-sponsor of this bill which declares that Federal policy shall encourage the development and use of product testing procedures which accurately reflect the acute health effects on humans of certain products, but... do not rely upon animal testing."
In more recent times, entire lobbying organizations have sprung up to oppose using animals for research. Perhaps one of the most notable is PETA – People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals. Although there have been a number of scientific breakthroughs from animal research, PETA not only opposes it but has made that a cornerstone of its organization.
"Right now, millions of mice, rats, rabbits, primates, cats, dogs, and other animals are locked inside cold, barren cages in laboratories across the country," PETA says on its web site, in defense of lab animals. "They languish in pain, ache with loneliness, and long to roam free and use their minds. Instead, all they can do is sit and wait in fear of the next terrifying and painful procedure that will be performed on them."
In 2008, then-Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois and his running mate, Sen. Joe Biden of Delaware, had both been given high marks by these animal rights groups for their defense of animals. Both went on to support animal rights legislation.
In 2013, Obama tweeted, "I think how we treat our animals reflects how we treat each other." He was later panned in the Twitterverse by Americans who reminded everyone that Obama once ate dog meat as a young man.
Not to be outdone, liberal socialist NYC Mayor Bill DeBlasio is so concerned about "animal rights" that he wants to ban horse-drawn carriages in Central Park, a measure that has little support among New Yorkers.
All of these things are being done to support animals, but these same Democrat leftists and others who share their ideology have no similar love for unborn human beings. In fact, they are all about using fetal tissue for medical research.
Fetal tissue research over-promises and under-delivers
The views of microbiologist Nathalia Holt are typical. Writing in the liberal pages of The New York Times in July following revelations that Planned Parenthood was selling aborted baby body parts for profit, she defended the practice as being necessary for medical research.
CBS News dutifully chimed in as well, claiming that various scientists supported fetal tissue research as essential to various fields of study.
"There's nothing that can't be done without fetal tissue," said pediatric neurosurgeon Ben Carson, a GOP presidential contender, in July following the Planned Parenthood revelations. "[I]t's been over-promised what the benefits of fetal research would be. And very much under-delivered."
A list of ten major medical breakthroughs thanks to animal testing spanning a century can be found here.
For abortion supporters and animal rights defenders, these won't matter because such discoveries justify ending the trafficking of human body parts and undermine the practice of abortion in general – two issues that garner cult-like approval in progressive liberal circles.
Sources include:
AnimalRights.About.com
All-Creatures.org
PETA.org
Twitchy.com
NYPost.com
NaturalNews.com
Breitbart.com
UnderstandingAnimalResearch.org.uk
All content posted on this site is commentary or opinion and is protected under Free Speech. Truth Publishing LLC takes sole responsibility for all content. Truth Publishing sells no hard products and earns no money from the recommendation of products. NaturalNews.com is presented for educational and commentary purposes only and should not be construed as professional advice from any licensed practitioner. Truth Publishing assumes no responsibility for the use or misuse of this material. For the full terms of usage of this material, visit www.NaturalNews.com/terms.shtml