Brett Berry Columnist

Last Thursday, a pipe bomb was detonated at a Massachusetts research lab specializing in stem cell research. Media coverage of this event was limited because no one was hurt. Many people aren't even aware that this bombing happened.

Even so, this event should disturb every one of us, including the adamant pro-lifers of the world opposed to stem cell research. No one should "value life" to the point where they are willing to take the life of someone else because that person supports stem cell research. To think with such logic is a contradiction in "valuing life." It is the thinking of a psychopath.

Regardless, the debate over embryonic stem cell research has gained momentum over the past year. It has grown to the point where the population has been essentially divided into two groups: those who view it as medical scientific research, and those who associate it with abortion.

To those who believe stem cell research is tantamount to abortion, try to understand what embryonic stem cells really are. These are not little embryos being ripped from women's uteruses. They are not little fetuses being grown in jars in a lab waiting for some mad scientist to perform experiments on them.

At one point, these cells did have the potential for life, but that potential has already been removed before they are ever used for research. In fact, the cells used for stem cell research typically come from embryos used in a process to create life: in-vitro fertilization.

These undifferentiated cells are essentially leftovers from this process, and they no longer can be used. They are typically discarded after the fertilization process anyway, so why not use them to perform research that could potentially cure dozens of diseases?

Granted, President Bush has allowed limited research on limited lines of stem cells. However, the majority of these lines are not usable for research, and federal restrictions have hindered our nation's scientists in their exploration of this technology. Earlier this year, letters signed by the majority of members from both houses of Congress were sent to Bush urging him to relax the restrictions on stem cell research. He refused, and he kept the restrictions in place.

Certainly, there should some guidelines put in place to ensure the ethical pursuit of this technology. However, this does not seem to be the administration's reason for putting such limits on stem cell research. The Bushes seem to be much more preoccupied with the idea that this research will not amount to anything.

In Bush's initial speech on the topic in 2001, he said that "while we're all hopeful about the potential of this research, no one can be certain that the science will live up to the hope it has generated." Three weeks ago, first lady Laura Bush defended her husband's staunch stance saying, "We don't even know that stem cell research will provide cures for anything - much less that it's very close."

Apparently, the Bushes view the word "potential" as meaning "false hope." They seem to believe that we shouldn't be touting the praises of stem cell research until we know for sure if it will yield cures lest we tease those suffering from disease with the idea of a healthy life. They basically want to play down stem cell research because they're not certain that it will yield cures.

But isn't that exactly what research is for? You make a hypothesis, and then you go out and test it. You take the results of the research and either confirm or change your hypothesis. It's the scientific method that we all learned in junior high.

Maybe the Bushes aren't familiar with the scientific method. Maybe that's why over 4,000 scientists, including 48 Nobel Prize winners, have signed a declaration condemning Bush's misuse, suppression and distortion of scientific advice.

Unfortunately, President Bush seems beholden to the religious zealots of our country, more satisfied to cater to the anti-abortion conservatives than to listen to scientists. Ron Reagan Jr., said that we have can choose "between the future and the past, between reason and ignorance, between true compassion and mere ideology." Bush seems to have made his choice.

Brett Berry is a regional development junior. He can be reached at letters@wildcat.arizona.edu.