Life Alert™

The Big Picture
Taking a Look at Proposed Stem Cell Research Legislation

THE LEGISLATION: Federally Funding Stem Cell Research

Washington, DC — On Tuesday, May 24, the House voted 238-194 to approve HR 810, known as the "Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act of 2005," sponsored by Delaware Republican Michael Castle. This legislation would allocate public tax dollars for the financial support of embryonic stem cell research, using human embryos donated from in vitro fertilization clinics. On the same day, the House also overwhelmingly passed HR 2520, the "Stem Cell Therapeutic and Research Act of 2005," voting 434-1. This alternative legislation proposed by New Jersey Republican Chris Smith would create a new federally funded stem cell research program using umbilical cord blood.

There are at least two simple reasons for the disparity in votes between these bills. First of all, the use of umbilical cord blood for stem cell research does not destroy innocent human life, and therefore does not have the same moral considerations as embryonic stem cell research. Secondly - as noted by Baltimore Cardinal William Keeler in a May 2005 letter to House members - unlike embryonic stem cell research, stem cell research using umbilical cord blood has led to many successful treatments.

Both bills were received in the Senate on May 26. Now, the "Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act of 2005" is before the U.S. Senate as S.471. President Bush has promised to veto S.471 if it is passed. Meanwhile, Pennsylvania Republican Sen. Arlen Specter, who is the lead sponsor of the bill, has claimed there is enough Senate support to override a presidential veto.

THE ARGUMENT: "They will just be thrown out anyway."

Disturbingly, the proponents of the "Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act of 2005" include members of Congress who otherwise vote pro-life. Part of the confusion arises from the fact that with this bill, the federally funded research would involve only human embryos that "were in excess of the clinical need of the individuals seeking [in vitro fertilization] treatment ... and would otherwise be discarded." According to the argument, because these embryos are going to be discarded, it is morally justifiable to destroy them for research. Perhaps we should take a step back and look at the big picture.

Ultimately, this argument rests on a utilitarian concept of human life that does not take into account the dignity of the individual person. It defines human embryos in terms not of persons, but of property, which may be donated and used for other purposes. In other words, the "leftover" embryos are unwanted and otherwise useless. Since they are destined for death anyway, why not use them to further potentially lifesaving research?

Analogously, imagine that it was proposed that thousands of elderly and terminally ill people should be gathered each year and subjected to lethal experimentation — justified both by the fact that their death is certain and by an unproved claim that such experimentation could yield "promising" results for others. Let us further imagine that such experimentation was already legally taking place, but unlike other (morally justifiable) research, has not resulted in any effective treatments of diseases. Lastly, suppose that the proposed legislation would mandate that US taxpayers financially support this research. This is precisely the logic behind Senate Bill 471.

Indeed, the source of the human embryos results in greater, not fewer, ethical problems. The fact that "unused" embryos exist in the first place already demonstrates that the personal dignity of each human life has not been fully recognized. In the case of the proposed legislation, we are talking about human embryos that are brought into existence, frozen, and subsequently thrown away because they are no longer useful; it is no wonder their personhood remains hidden. Moreover, a 2003 study of the RAND Corporation of IVF Clinics states that only 2.2 percent of the approximately 400,000 currently frozen human embryos are scheduled to be discarded, and only a small percentage of those have potential for research. Might IVF clinics be encouraged to produce a greater number of unused embryos, with the anticipation that some will be donated for research? Will women be exploited for their eggs?

ACTION: Please contact Maryland Senators Paul Sarbanes and Barbara Mikulski

If you are a Maryland resident, please take a moment to send a pre-written letter to the Maryland Senators, urging them to oppose S.471, "Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act of 2005." If you are not a Maryland resident, find your Senators' contact information here.
Or, contact them directly:
Senator Paul S. Sarbanes (D), (202) 224-4524
Senator Barbara Mikulski (D), (202) 224-4654

WHAT'S NEXT?: Where embryonic stem cell research is heading

The "Stem Cell Research Act of 2005" is only a stepping stone to the horrors that would follow. If the bill were to become law, it would soon become clear that the funded research would be limited and unsuccessful -- due to the small number of donated embryos potentially yielding stem cell lines, as well as the tendency of embryonic stem cell treatments to result in tumors and immune rejection. For this reason, many scientists believe that if embryonic stem cell research is to be successful, it must involve cloning the person who is to benefit from the stem cell treatment.

On April 4 and April 20, I directed your attention to the "Maryland Stem Cell Research Act of 2005." Thankfully, the bill was not passed and a disaster was averted. The legislation included language that would allow human cloning and the "harvesting" of human fetuses by implanting cloned human embryos into women's wombs. The only limitation would be that the cloned, unborn child could not legally be born. This bill was not unique. For example, a similar embryonic stem cell research bill, explicitly regulating "cadaveric fetal tissue," was recently passed in New Jersey.

HOW CAN I SUPPORT THE WORK OF PRO-LIFE MARYLAND?

· Click here to bless us with a donation.
· If you can volunteer your time and talents. Internships are available.
· Please pray for our work and for the protection of innocent human life.

RESOURCE: Life Brief™ Newsletter - Issue 1

· Click here for the premiere issue of the Life Brief™ Newsletter for more on embryonic stem cell research.

Anthony R. Souza, MTS
President & CEO