Unfettered Musings

Tuesday, October 26, 2004

Brad Pitt the Activist

You know, if I hear another celebrity railing on things he is obviously clueless about, I do believe I will scream.

This morning ET reported that the so-called A list star was backing California's Proposition 71, an initiative that would allow tax payer money to be used to fund stem cell research in the form of grants and loans in the state of California. Opponents of the initiative say that it amounts to nothing more than corporate welfare. I agree. When grants are offered for a certain kind of research the grant becomes the goal, the research becomes secondary. Not to mention the number of consciencious objectors who see legitimate ethical problems with embryionic stem cell research. Unfortunately for them, they are in the vast minority in California.

Of course presidential candidate Kerry, grinning that Gomer Pylesque grin, is only too delighted to have another celebrity on board. After all, in Kerry's reality Hollywood is the voice of mainstream America. One of Kerry's favorite campaign talking points is the fallacy that G. W. Bush has banned stem cell research. In fact he has not, he just promotes the restriction of creating embryos for the purpose of detroying them. He also believes that federal funding should not be used for said research, because he recognizes that there are a large number of us who feel that it is ethically wrong to destroy human life for the purpose of research. Still, Kerry promotes the idea that Bush is anti-stem cell research by saying absurd things like Bush would have been against the invention of the vehicle and electricity. Kerry considers legalized murder just another form of ingenuity. This same presidential candidate asserts that "The success of a free society depends on how it treats it's most vulnerable citizens." Uh.....you mean like the unborn?

Some would argue that there are other sources of stem cells that don't neccessitate the destroying of an embryo. That is true, but the initiative provides no means by which to oversee how the funds are spent, so whoever receives funding is accountable to no one for the kind of stem cell research they are doing, embryonic or otherwise.

Another important point is whether or not California can afford to take this on. Aren't we always hearing about how bad off California is? Opponents have this to say:

"It's wrong to launch a costly new state bureaucracy when vital programs for health, education, and police and fire services are being cut. We cannot afford to pile another $3 billion in bonded debt on top of a state budget teetering on the edge of financial ruin.

General Fund bond debt will grow from $33 Billion on May 1, 2004, to a Legislative Accounting Office projection of $50.75 Billion in debt by June 30, 2005-a staggering 54% increase in just 14 months!"

C'mon Ahnold. You promised to dig the state OUT of the hole it was in when you ran for govenor. Do you really support this? We know how Brad feels. He is a high dollar celebrity who has an accountant to find every loophole in the tax laws to minimize what he pays. He has more money than sense. He doesn't care how this affects his state's economy. He doesn't have to get his hands dirty. He can afford to pretend to be a voice for this new brand of "morality" because he doesn't have to look into the eyes of a man who just lost his job because his company can't afford to stay in California. He doesn't have to deal with the ethics of destroying a human embryo in the name of medical research, a line of research that has proven to be only marginally useful at best. He doesn't have to give an account when the state goes belly up from the massive amounts of taxing and spending that are occuring there.

Nope, he'll just flash that winning smile and move on to the next cause. I'd stick with the grisslies if I were you, Brad.

And California, stick up for the unborn and for your tax dollars and vote NO to Proposition 71.

(For more information on the pros and cons of this initiative, go here.)