Tricky Debates

The Australian Senate this week passed a bill to relax restrictions on therapeutic cloning for stem cell research in Australia.

Understandably the debate that preceded the vote was full of passion, principle and anger. The result has upset some segments of the community and been celebrated by others. I personally can see both sides of this argument and do not begrudge anyone for their views on these very sensitive issues but I do think it is worth keeping a few things in perspective.

We have seen these moral arguments before. Issues such as legalised abortion, euthanasia and even IVF have split political parties and the community. Whatever the particular battle, the argument against these sorts of procedures and research are usually based on the notion that scientists should not ‘play God’.

It is worth remembering at this point that ‘man’ (read: humans, people or whatever word you prefer) has been playing God for a very long time. Since the earliest days of medical experimentation people have been altering nature through the use of drugs and surgery in an attempt to prolong life and improve health. This is effectively ‘playing God’ and was often labelled as such. The truth is that we love ‘playing God’. We do it when we clear-fell forests, when we create pollution, when we divert and dam rivers and especially when we go to war and decide that thousands of innocent people should be killed for the perceived benefit of others. I find it curious that it is often those that condone these sorts of actions who will then argue against ‘playing God’ when it comes to science.

I therefore think that ‘playing God’ should be struck off the ‘valid argument’ list and instead politicians should evaluate issues based on the real or potential damage or benefits that can be gained or lost by new developments in the scientific arena.

Of course there are very strong arguments against the ‘killing’ of embryos for research. It is virtually impossible for consensus to be reached about when life begins and whether that life can be justifiably terminated, but it is pure hypocrisy for a Senator or anyone else to stand up and say that a two week old embryo has a right to life when they themselves have probably eaten meat for lunch. I’m not a vegetarian but I would still find it difficult to morally defend the argument that a human embryo has more right to life than a fully grown cow, fish, chicken or pig.

As humans in the First World we are doomed to hypocrisy. Our moral radars are constantly being recalibrated. Ethics are quickly abandoned in pursuit of a few dollars and we are very good at justifying to ourselves anything that we do.

Our decision makers should be using their consciences to navigate difficult issues but they must be consistent in this. To find a conscience only when it is politically expedient is possibly the most immoral thing a politician can do. I think God would agree.

Sorry for the lack of humour this week. God, embryos, politicians and science should really be a lot funnier. I’ll try harder next time.

Stay tuned.

Flying

I have just returned from yet another trip interstate. I have managed to squeeze about eight trips in this year which is pretty good for someone who only works part-time. It would not be possible except for the wonderful discount airlines Virgin Blue and Jetstar.

I’m not afraid of flying. I am however, afraid of plummeting to my death in a metal tube full of strangers but I never let that obscure the fact that I actually like being in the plane. There is still something very cool about taking off and travelling above the clouds at 1000km/h.

I also enjoy the flight attendants on Virgin Blue in particular. The girls always have names like Trinity or Harmony. The sort of names reserved for flight attendants and strippers. Sometimes they have names like Eleena. That's one of those names that parents make up that kind of sound like real names but actually aren’t. Like Joeesha or Rebeccany. As far as the male attendants go I think Civil Aviation regulations require that all male flight attendants are pleasant, well groomed and just a little bit camp.

The Virgin attendants (make your own obligatory virgin joke there) also love slipping cute little jokes into their routine patter to lighten the mood of the passengers. They’ll often slip in things like “If in the unlikely event this plane becomes a boat, floatation devices can be found under your seat” or “Please ensure that you don’t forget your belongings, children or husbands as items left on the plane will be distributed evenly among the crew.” Hilarious stuff that sometimes even gets applause from the passengers. I would love to know who writes their material.

Some people don’t like flying with the discount airlines because they resent not getting free food or a movie on the flight. That doesn’t bother me. For the amount of money I save on Virgin or Jetstar fares I can afford to go to a real movie and have a real dinner instead of eating some sloppy stroganoff while watching an appalling romantic comedy on a vaguely visible TV screen.

There is free audio entertainment on the discount flights if you bring your own headphones. I highly recommend that you do bring your own as the little red ones they sell for $2 aren’t very comfortable and would be better used to extract confessions at Guantanamo Bay than to provide entertainment on a long flight.

I usually choose the comedy channel to listen to. All airlines have one and they are all very similar. For every minute of genuinely funny comedy there will be at least ten minutes of pointless dross. They also like to set the audio level on the comedy channel much lower than the other channels. This is a cute little prank and is where the real comedy happens. As passengers tune in to get a small dose of levity to drown out the baby in the next seat that is clearly racking up their Frequent Cryer points they are forced to turn the volume up to full to hear the jokes. Then of course the mandatory unfunny comedy piece comes on (usually some Guido Hatzis or something equally banal) tempting the listener to change the channel. This is the punchline. When they change the channel they are instantly hit by ear piercingly loud music because they forgot to adjust the volume first. I’m pretty sure the pilots monitor this and laugh heartily every time it happens. I’m guessing whoever thought of this gag may also be responsible for writing the attendant’s comedy material.

Passengers on a plane are interesting to watch. They seem to love queuing but I’m not sure why. They queue up eagerly to get on the plane, but then can’t seem to get off the plane fast enough at the other end. Despite pushing to get on (especially if it’s unallocated seating) as soon as the seatbelt light goes out at the end of the flight and long before the doors are even opened the passengers are all standing up, squashed into the aisles or wedged awkwardly under the overhead compartments, juggling bags, baby strollers (the kid’s still crying) and jackets ready to get out of there as soon as possible.

And so they stand there… and stand there… and stand there… and stand there. It always takes at least five minutes for the doors to actually open and for the passengers in front of you to leave. But everyone insists on standing up poised for action. And what are they rushing for? Where are they going? Of course. They have to be the first ones to the baggage carousel so they can stand there for a further fifteen minutes until their bags arrive. The queuing now takes the form of a human fence around the carousel. The bags haven’t yet come into view but the barrier ensures that anyone behind them whose bags are actually there can’t get through to collect them. God forbid that everyone could just stand back and approach the carousel once their bags are spotted. But I guess they are all just keen to get their bags so that they can rush off to the next queue at the parking ticket machine and then jump into their cars so they can queue up again at the exit gate.

I’m not quite sure where this queuing mentality comes from but it does make me worry a little though. Watching this behaviour really doesn’t instil me with much confidence that in the unlikely event that the plane does becomes a boat that the passengers would proceed in an orderly fashion to the emergency exit. I’m pretty sure they would instead be pushing, shoving, getting in each other’s way, screaming and crying while the attendants pleasantly divide the leftover belongings amongst themselves.