President Bush's prime time speech announcing his stem cell decision had something for everyone, but may end up satisfying no one. I was gratified that he reiterated his opposition to cloning, including cloning to obtain embryonic stem cells. I was happy to hear that Dr. Leon Kass, who has a deep respect for innocent human life, will head up a Commission on the issue. But, beyond that there is little to celebrate in the President's announcement and much that saddens me.
Here is the central dilemma in what Bush has done. By supporting taxpayer subsidies for embryonic stem cell research from human embryos that have already been killed, he has planted a time bomb that will likely result in the pro-life side losing this debate. Let's assume the funding is provided and six months from now a researcher announces: "Yes, indeed, embryonic stem cells do cure Parkinson's disease." At that point the demand to kill tens of thousands of human embryos from the utilitarian crowd will be overwhelming and the moral high ground will already have been surrendered.
The stem cells that the President is willing to use are "fruit from the poison tree." They came from little human beings that were destroyed. To say that they are already dead misses the point. There are thousands of prisoners on death row who have exhausted their appeals and are awaiting execution. Since they are already condemned to die why not "harvest" their livers, kidneys, etc., without their consent in order to help someone who is suffering. Most of us recoil from that kind of argument, as we should. They take organs from prisoners in China, where the government recognizes no Creator above itself. But we could never do such a thing here, where we recognize that it is wrong to cannibalize one life to aid another without consent.
The pro-abortion crowd in Congress is already screaming and charging today the President did not go far enough. While divided, most of the pro-life movement is basically aghast that he went this far. By mid-morning, the Bush decision had been condemned by the Catholic Bishops, American Family Radio, American Life League and the Southern Baptist Life Commission.
Pro-life congressional leaders, like Sen. Sam Brownback (R-KS) and Rep. Tom DeLay (R-TX), were trying to find a silver lining, but expressing deep concerns that the foot is now in the door for more destruction of innocent human life. The Family Research Council has also stood up against the decision and the Christian Legal Society is headed to federal court to block enforcement of the President's decision, citing the 1995 law banning federal funding of research that kills a human life. That law as signed by Bill Clinton, arguably America's most pro-abortion president.
And, now there is a new problem. Over the past weekend, it was discovered that the regulations the President will issue to govern the collecting of stem cells are even less restrictive than what the Clinton Administration allowed. Once that fact circulates on talk shows, in pro-life newsletters and on various web sites, the backlash facing the White House will only grow. Last Thursday's speech is not the end of this mess, it only the beginning.
In closing - do not despair. This is the early part of the first inning of a long ball game that will last not months but years. The lesson of last night's speech is that we must continue to politely, but firmly, pressure our friends in government, including the White House, to remember who elected them and what they promised to do. As your loyal servant that is what I am committed to doing.
I believe with each passing day, more pro-life leaders will conclude that the decision is fatally flawed. I have included statements from some of America's most respected pro-life leaders on the President's "compromise." As always, it is my hope that the pro-life community will speak with one voice in defense of life.
Sincerely,
Gary L. Bauer
Chairman
Campaign for Working Families Political Action Committee
Rep. Tom DeLay (R-TX), House Majority Whip - "While we all deeply sympathize with the desperate hopes of people struggling with debilitating illnesses, the technique used to create the stem cell lines did not respect the sanctity of life. We can both defend life and support medical research that offers similar results by using adult stem cells.
"I'm worried that this initial research may ultimately serve as a pretext for vastly expanded research that does require the destruction of new living embryos. I will continue working to educate a majority of Americans that we should always defend innocent life." Contact: Emily Miller, 202/225-0197
Rep. Chris Smith (R-NJ) - "The proposal to allow federal funding for experimentation on stem cells obtained through the destruction of living human embryos is a mistake. Allowing the use of stem cells obtained from human embryos to receive federal funding, however limited or defined, opens a new door that may prove difficult to close. As the author of the responsible Stem Cell Research Act of 2001 (H.R. 2096), I remain confident that science will continue to show that stem cells obtained from non-embryonic sources, including umbilical cord blood, placentas and plentiful adult tissues, are the quickest, most promising and only ethical route to achieve significant medical advances." Contact: Peter Dickenson - 202/225-376
Rep. Joe Pitts (R-PA) - "I am disappointed that the President has decided to use stem cells from killed human embryos. They have been unethically acquired, and should not be used for science. Although we use the voluntarily donated organs of accident victims, we do not use the organs of murder victims for science."[Emphasis added] "Many Americans have already been helped by adult stem cells. No one has yet been helped by embryonic stem cells, and may never be. He should have made this clear." http://www.house.gov/pitts
Rep. Bob Barr (R-GA) - "I fully support the President's decision not to use federal funds for the killing of human embryos to acquire stem cells, but cannot, and will not, support a Trojan horse proposal that opens the door to federally funded research on human embryos. I recognize the many competing and passionate interests on both sides of this issue, but a true commitment to human life cannot be applied on a case-by-case basis. To that end, I am disappointed with the President's decision to initiate federally funded embryonic stem cell research. It is morally and ethically wrong, and I will continue to oppose it." Contact: Brian Walsh - 202/225-2931
Bishop Joseph A. Fiorenza, President of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops - "President Bush has reaffirmed his support for a ban on human cloning and other policies that deserve support in their own right. However, the trade-off he has announced is morally unacceptable. The federal government, for the first time in history, will support research that relies on the destruction of some defenseless human beings for possible benefit to others. However such a decision is hedged about with qualifications, it allows our nation's research enterprise to cultivate disrespect for human life.
"Researchers who want to pursue destructive embryo research and their allies in Congress have already rejected such limits, saying that these limits will interfere with efforts to turn embryonic stem cell research into possible medical treatments. The President's policy may therefore prove to be as unworkable as it is morally wrong, ultimately serving only those whose goal is unlimited embryo research.
"We hope and pray that President Bush will return to a principled stand against treating some human lives as nothing more than objects to be manipulated and destroyed for research purposes. As we face a new century of powerful and sometimes even frightening advances in biotechnology, we must help ensure that our technical advances will serve rather than demean our very humanity." Contact: Sr. Mary Ann Walsh - 202/541-3000
Phyllis Schlafly, President of Eagle Forum - "President Bush made the wrong decision morally, scientifically, legally, and politically by approving federal funds for embryonic stem cell research. Embryonic stem cell research in the name of the 'greatest public good' is wrong. It is unworthy of this great nation. Human beings at the earliest stage of development deserve respect and protection by virtue of their humanity.
"Did he have an alternative? Yes. President Bush could have chosen only to support ethical stem cell research, which has proven more successful scientifically. Over 11,000 babies are born every day in the United States. Parents can now choose to preserve their child's umbilical cord blood, which is rich in stem cells. If every parent made this decision, every human being would then have a supply of stem cells available to treat future ailments or disease.
"In 1995, Congress outlawed federal funding for 'research in which a human embryo or embryos are destroyed, discarded, or knowingly subjected to the risk of injury or death.' The law is quite clear. Yet, President Bush embraced the Clintonian interpretation that, if private funds were used to kill the embryos, then federal funds can be used to conduct research on their remains. Congress should immediately reinforce the 1995 law to ensure that all embryos will be protected from facing a death sentence in the name of experimental research, regardless of who pays for it." Tel: 202/544-0353 - Fax: 202/544-547-6996 - E-Mail: eagle@eagleforum.org
David Stevens, M.D., Executive Director of the Christian Medical Association - "I am concerned that, by funding research on embryos who were previously destroyed, we are breaking down a vital moral barrier. This moral barrier is embodied by the longstanding ethical medical principle of 'do no harm.' This moral barrier is also embodied by the biblical principle, 'Thou shalt not kill.'
"If it is wrong to destroy human embryos for research purposes, it is wrong to use human embryos who already have been destroyed for research purposes. In light of this truth, I am concerned that this decision may encourage a view of human embryos not as a precious human life made in God's image, but as a commodity for our manipulation.
"Such a view of human embryos flouts ethical principles contained in the Nuremberg Code and in the National Institutes of Health's 'Guidelines for the Conduct of Research Involving Human Subjects.' Both clearly express the fundamental principle governing human experimentation that 'no experiment should be conducted where there is an a priori reason to believe that death or disabling injury will occur.
"Our nation as a whole and specifically our scientific community must address this moral question head-on and determine that we will value and protect human life in all its stages of development. To do any less than this will imperil not only the unborn, but all of us." Tel: 703/503-1158 - FAX: 703-503-7121
Rep. Jim McDermott (D-WA) [An Advocate for Research on Human Embryos] (USA-Today, 8/10-01) - He said if Bush's decision means research on embryonic stem cells will go forward, even with limits, "I would back him in a minute. If he goes that far, we've got him," said McDermott, a psychiatrist. "The push of science will push open the door."
Our thanks to Colleen Parro of the Republican National Coalition for Life assembling these statements. |
