The Massachusetts Legislature passed a research-friendly stem cell bill over the objections of Governor and Spokesmodel Mitt Romney recently, so the Boston Globe today turns its op-ed page over to the controversy.

Michael Sandel, a Harvard political philosopher, carefully analyzes the ethical objections to the different types of stem cells, and exposes the inconsistency in Romney’s position:

…if he believes that embryos are human beings with inalienable rights, he should oppose all embryonic stem cell research, not only research on cloned embryos. If extracting stem cells from a blastocyst is morally equivalent to yanking organs from a baby, then it is abhorrent no matter how the embryo came into being.

Then there’s Lawrence Summers, the current president of Harvard. The first three paragraphs remind us that stem cell research can relieve suffering. Then comes the heart of his argument:

Our universities and hospitals create new high-paying jobs in large numbers. They are magnets for the world’s most talented and ambitious young people who stay here in large numbers after concluding their studies. They remain because the scientific work is intense and satisfying and the Boston area is a vibrant and exciting place to be.

That our great universities and hospitals are not going to move or be bought out by an out-of-state acquirer is not a reason for them to be taken for granted by policy makers.

I find this column flat-footed. Sandel’s provides an analysis by which we can understand the differences between the pro’s and anti’s, and challenges the anti’s by understanding their position. Summers’ piece has no sympathy for the people he’s trying to influence. Massachusetts legislators who voted against the bill for moral and religious reason are not going to be swayed by an economic argument, any more than those who wanted to see Terri Schiavo’s heart kept pumping would have agreed to unplug her once they found out how much it cost to keep her alive. Plus, there’s a whiny, self-centered tone to the piece, as if “not compromising” Harvard’s Stem Cell Institute takes precedence over human life: If you think (as I totally do not) that killing fertilized eggs is murder, the preservation of the Harvard institute that depends on murder just isn’t going to be a top priority.

In the third op-ed on the page, Bradley Jones, the minority leader of the House, skips any argument about why he opposes therapeutic cloning — he’s also against in vitro fertilization — and suggests a slower, step-by-step set of laws would be better because there are “so many unanswered questions about the process and the ethics of cloning.” There’s not much to the column beyond that brief boiling-down.

The prolific Hiawatha Bray has a review of the Sony PSP (portable PlayStation) that I found useful from the gamer’s point of view. Wesley Morris, a movie critic, reviews it as a movie watching device:

Nobody is watching the works of Russian director Andrei Tarkovsky on this thing. Or better yet: No one should. The PSP is only slightly more ideal for watching Sony’s ”Spider-Man 2,” which is included with some players.

On the PSP, I marveled at the sharpness of the picture and the boldness of the colors. I was again impressed with Tobey Maguire’s skills as a scrappy comedian as well as with the shrewdness of the writing and directing. But soon I noticed that viewing a movie on a hand-held game console makes you feel obligated to play it somehow.

Baddabing.

BTW, feel free to send me any left over PSPs you have hanging around. Thanks in advance…

[Technorati tags: harvard BostonGlobe summers stemcells psp]

Categories: Uncategorized dw