The sleight of hand that rocks the cradle

Let’s try to get a grip on the controversy in Missouri over the stem cell initiative.

Here’s an op-ed piece in the Springfield News-Leader from 9/3/06 by John E. Dunsford, Professor Professor of Law at the St. Louis University School of Law:

Pro-cloning group needs to tell truthIt is strange that an organization identifying itself as a “Coalition for Lifesaving Cures” needs to sponsor a professional advertising campaign at a cost of millions of dollars seeking to persuade Missouri voters to support stem-cell research. If prospects for life-saving cures are so bright, why do private investors find it too risky and shy away? No one has ever yet been cured of a disease by the research sought in this initiative, yet the impression is conveyed by its sponsors that a range of terrible diseases such as Parkinson’s, cancer, multiple sclerosis, etc. will soon be conquered.

Now Dunsford is asking the right questions and raising the right points.

Unfortunately, the proponents of the initiative have chosen to advertise the plan with the hype of a commercial for lottery tickets. That inevitably generates further suspicion that something must be going on that is not being disclosed. Are the voters being misled on matters they ought to be aware of when they cast their votes Nov. 7?

There’s a trend to this. (See the reporting on this blog on the South Dakota referendum on the protection of life law here, here, here and here.)

In its very title, the initiative proposal uses sleight of hand in maintaining that its object is the preservation of stem cell research and cures. In fact, stem cell research is already well accepted as far as adult stem cells are concerned.

The controversy regarding the present initiative results solely from the fact that it seeks to palm off the phrase “stem cell research” to include experimentation on human embryos.

If they are aware of what is at stake, how many people would vote for the destruction of one human life to obtain the embryonic stem cells to help another? Does the end justify the means? That is what the initiative is asking the voter to approve.In the official summary that the voter will receive in the election booth, the claim is made that the constitutional amendment will “ban human cloning or attempted cloning.”
By accepted definitions of “cloning,” however, this statement is unequivocally false…The sponsors point out that it is not their intention to produce a complete baby. In other words, their rationalization is that the embryo will be destroyed in the research before it could grow into a baby. But, of course, it still remains nascent human life at the embryonic stage when it will be cut apart.

In the official summary that the voter will receive in the election booth, the claim is made that the constitutional amendment will “ban human cloning or attempted cloning.”By accepted definitions of “cloning,” however, this statement is unequivocally false…The sponsors point out that it is not their intention to produce a complete baby. In other words, their rationalization is that the embryo will be destroyed in the research before it could grow into a baby. But, of course, it still remains nascent human life at the embryonic stage when it will be cut apart.

As pointed out here in other posts, the result of conception is the earliest phase of life of the species homo sapiens, a point that’s not arguable. It comes down to that. And it’s the same life that will later be an embryo, a fetus, an infant, a toddler, an adolescent, a teenager, an adult, and never with more or less dignity at any stage, because that is not an assignable value. It is inherent.

So the message is, let’s have clarity.

If coalition proponents wish to endorse “clone and destroy” as their mantra, they ought to be upfront about it. They should not be permitted to abuse the state constitution by a pretense. As they have in the past, Missourians will support every honest effort to find cures for the afflicted, but not at the price of destroying human life. The end does not justify the means.