by Bishop John Leibrecht, Bishop of Springfield-Cape Girardeau, Missouri
I am deeply grateful to our priests and deacons who preached at Mass two weeks ago about the dignity of every human being from the first moment of embryonic existence. You and I began life as microscopic beings in our mother’s wombs. Our respect for the human being, from inception, is the basis for keeping the human embryo from being used for research.
The debate over using stem cells for research focuses on the use of cells obtained by destroying days-old human embryos. Using stem cells from adults for research, which has been done for decades with many positive results, presents no fundamental ethical concern. Catholic teaching supports stem cell research. It does not support use of embryonic stem cells for the research.
Donn Rubin of Missouri Coalition for Lifesaving Cures, which supports use of stem cells from cloned human embryos, writes that Catholic bishops and priests should remain “true to the science” in their comments. We have been and will be. We teach the scientific fact that the embryo, from its first moment of existence, is both human and alive. If it were not for that scientific fact, researchers would show no interest in the embryo’s stem cells.
Missouri citizens must consider the ethical propriety of destroying an embryo to harvest its stem cells. Does the end, in this case the good intention of seeking cures for disease, necessarily justify the means? No. History offers sad examples of political leaders and medical researchers using unethical and unjust means in search of a worthwhile good. Many of us do not agree with Senator John Danforth who, in a search for cures of disease, approves harvesting stem cells which requires the destruction of human embryos.
Like many of you, I recently received by mail the first material from a highly financed year-long Initiative campaign aimed at legalizing embryonic stem cell research in Missouri. A letter from Senator John Danforth and his associates offers three reasons for such legislation.
Reason one: The federal law allows embryonic stem cell research and, therefore, so should Missouri. But if what is allowed by federal law becomes our ethical norm, then opposition to federally sanctioned abortion should cease.
Reason two: Missouri medical institutions should be permitted to use embryonic stem cells because several other states permit their use. But Missourians are not known for always wanting to keep up with the Joneses, especially on what are considered unethical practices.
Reason three: The Initiative professes that it bans cloning a human being. In fact, the Initiative makes the bittersweet promise that, after cloning human embryos for research purposes, scientists will not be allowed to develop the clone to maturity. The Initiative legalizes human cloning because it permits cloning human embryos. Once human cloning is legalized, future amendments can be made to further broaden what is already legal. Remember how legalized gambling started with a few boats in a few places, and then was amended to what we see today? Prudent fear regarding legalization of human cloning may be appropriate.
The Initiative letter also claims that its proposal does “not require the state to fund stem cell research” (italics added), but does not point out that it will allow your taxes and mine to go for embryonic stem cell research through future legislative action. This wording in the Initiative letter should put us on notice about how issues can be only partially (cleverly) framed.
The scientific fact to be kept before us is the humanity of the alive cloned embryo. A related religious belief is that the human embryo, precisely because it is human, deserves to be protected from becoming an unethical means used for a desirable end.
