The 2004 election left many voters in both
parties feeling disaffected, anxious, and disempowered. Much has been
said since November about the “red state/blue state” divide, and about
how polarized our nation has become. In this environment, bioethics
issues (stem-cell research being the most salient example) have become
“political footballs.” Such complex questions can hardly be reduced to
five-second sound bites, however. Coupled with the need for unbiased,
easy-to-understand information is a need for greater tolerance of
nuance. Bioethics issues are typically not black and white and cannot
be resolved by a simple appeal to abstract principles—on either end of
the political spectrum.
The Women’s Bioethics Project sees a silver lining to the contentious
political climate. The post-election analysis that highlighted the
importance of “moral values” to voters has become part of the general
consciousness, and Americans are primed to think in these terms. By
bringing moral values to the fore, the 2004 election has opened a
window of opportunity to bring more complex, reasoned reflection to
bioethical issues.
In addition, the importance of the stem-cell and abortion issues to the
past political cycle has heightened public awareness of bioethics. The
media is covering these issues, and the general public is beginning to
understand that bioethical issues are real and will affect their lives;
policies are being made, and courts are making decisions about them.
|
