Stem Cell Deception

Stem Cell Deception<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />
By Michael K. Whitehead
 
How do you define "deception?"  "An embryo is not an embryo unless it's implanted."
 
That's the argument of a <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" />Kansas City Star editorial (2/22/08)  which follows a recent decision by Cole County Circuit Court Judge Patricia Joyce.  (See the decision here.)
 
A pro-life citizens group, Missouri Cures Without Cloning, has proposed a constitutional amendment to appear on the ballot at the next general election, to ban – really ban-human cloning in Missouri.   In 2006, Missourians narrowly passed a Constitutional amendment,  "Amendment 2" which purported to ban human cloning, but then redefined cloning to exclude any human embryos which were not implanted in the womb.  The purpose of the Amendment was to protect in the constitution the right of the bio-tech business in Missouri to engage in embryonic stem cell research, using the process of Somatic Cell Nuclear Transfer – SCNT.    SCNT is cloning, the same process by which Dolly the Sheep was cloned.  Missourians voted to pass the amendment only by a margin of 51-49% -- especially noteworthy after Cloners spent a record $28 million in the PR campaign.
 
Now, opponents to Amendment 2 want to propose a new constitutional amendment to amend Amendment 2, and to redefine the ban on cloning to include human embryos created by SCNT, whether or not they are implanted in a womb.    Under the initiative process in Missouri law, the Secretary of State is charged to review the proposed amendment and draft a summary statement of the measure, in 100 words or less, to appear on the petitions as they are circulated, and upon the ballot.  Secretary Robin Carnahan proposed a ballot summary which said the measure would "repeal the current ban on human cloning and to limit Missouri patients' access to stem cell research, therapies and cures approved by voters in November 2006."
 
Cures Without Cloning filed suit in the fall of 2007, and Judge Joyce ruled in their favor on February 20.
 
The Star editor complains that the circuit judge has "sided with opponents of the stem cell procedure" by striking down Secretary Carnahan's ballot summary as misleading.
 
The judge simply followed the law – which requires that the ballot summary fairly describe what the proposal actually says.  Ms. Carnahan's assertion that  CWC's measure would "repeal the current ban on human cloning" was simply untrue.    CWC wants to broaden the cloning ban, by extending its protection to unimplanted embryos.
 
The Star  admits there are "disputed definitions" of the word "embryo" but then only mentions one, that an embryo begins "with implantation."
 
Many biologists define "embryo" at the moment of fertilization, or at the first cell division.  Implantation is just a change in geography, a change in nurturing environment, not a change in the nature of the embryo.
 
If 219,193 Missouri voters sign petitions, Missourians will have the right to vote on the definition of cloning embryos without a misleading ballot summary.  No deception,  just democracy.   
 
How do you spell "deception" about stem cells?  In Kansas City, we spell it  S-T-A-R.
 
See the Baptist Press report on the court decision here.
 
© Copyright, Michael K. Whitehead, 2008.  
Whitehead Law Firm, LLC
1100 Main, Ste 2600,
Kansas City, MO 64105
 mkw64064@mac.com 
 
Permission granted for not-for-sale copies in exact form including copyright.  Other uses require written permission.

Support Our Broadcast Network

We're a 100% Listener Supported Network

3 Simple Ways to Support WVW Foundation

Credit Card
100% Tax-Deductable
Paypal
100% Tax-Deductable

Make Monthly Donations

 

-or-

A One-Time Donation

 
Mail or Phone
100% Tax-Deductable
  • Mail In Your Donation

    Worldview Weekend Foundation
    PO BOX 1690
    Collierville, TN, 38027 USA

  • Donate by Phone

    901-825-0652

WorldviewFinancialTV.com Banner