From the Bishop of Kansas City, MO, H.E. Most Rev. Robert Finn. This is published in The Catholic Key.
Bishop Finn on President Obama’s Executive Order
Kansas City – St. Joseph Bishop Robert W. Finn issued the following statement today responding to President Barack Obama’s Executive Order on Embryonic Stem Cell Research:
Statement on the President’s Order for Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research
Most Reverend Robert W. Finn
Bishop of Kansas City-St. JosephPresident Barack Obama has kept another campaign promise today as he signed the executive order which will allow federal funds to be spent on destructive human embryonic stem cell research.
I join my voice to that of other Catholic leaders, and other men and women of good will, in denouncing this newest step by the President to eventually remove all legal protections for innocent, nascent human life.
The President boldly proclaimed that he was taking the politics out of science. Rather, it seems clear that he is only asserting “his politics” over life itself.
In the Fall of 2006, we proved in Missouri that if we teach the truth about human cloning and scientific experimentation with human embryos, more and more people will reject the pretense and false hope of this still unsuccessful research.
While breakthroughs continue to be documented in adult stem cell research, taxpayer money will now be siphoned into the coffers of medical researchers to fund projects so dubious that they would never waste their own money on them. These experiments on human embryos, while they have always remained legal, have never produced any medical benefits. The thing that differentiates human embryonic stem cell research from adult stem cell research is that, with embryonic experiments, there are no results. There are no cures. The great “hope” that was promised is an illusion.
Americans should urge the Congress to appropriate no money for such research. Missourians should urge their Missouri Legislature to quickly pass The Taxpayer Protection Amendment (SJR 17), to prevent Missouri tax-dollars from paying for these destructive experiments.
Loading ...
I wonder about the “it has not been successful” argument is really prudent. I know it’s done for tactical gains, but I think it really undercuts the real issue here. These are humans which are being experimented on. Even if it becomes successful in finding cures, it’s still immoral.
These are unique humans, not just cells which they clone (stem cell ‘lines’) for experimentation. Just because they can’t complain doesn’t make it OK. Furthermore, they are using the utilitarian argument about “they would die anyway”. It’s the Joseph Mengele argument: “After all, the government would just kill the Jews anyway – why not experiment on them to advance ‘science'”?
Where oh where is the outrage from the USCCB? Surely the should be able to muster the courage to condemn this crime against humanity.
Our new President is rhetorically and legislatively actioning incremental changes “boldly, and swiftly.”
Which one of our good bishops said the election of Barack Obama was an “apocalyptic event?”
I really don’t understand the stem cell debate at all. Recent research shows that stem cells can be made from skin cells. Why do the powers that be want to destroy babies? I just don’t get it.
Don: See USCCB statement below.
http://www.usccb.org/comm/archives/2009/09-052.shtml
Today on Relevant Radio, Sheila Liaugminas, their network correspondent, in discussing Obama’s move, referenced something said by the Holy Father when he spoke to the UN last year:
“This never requires a choice to be made between science and ethics: rather it is a question of adopting a scientific method that is truly respectful of ethical imperatives.”
And Obabma today:
“But in recent years, when it comes to stem cell research, rather than furthering discovery, our government has forced what I believe is a false choice between sound science and moral values. In this case, I believe the two are not inconsistent.”
“I wonder about the “it has not been successful” argument is really prudent. I know it’s done for tactical gains, but I think it really undercuts the real issue here. These are humans which are being experimented on. Even if it becomes successful in finding cures, it’s still immoral.”
Good catch, Tzard. Even if current results were reversed (meaning embryonic stem cell research had produced results and adult stem cell research had produced nothing), embryonic stem cell would be no less immoral.
If the prospect of medical and/or financial success is on our side in convincing someone to choose a more moral path, however (especially someone not predisposed to factor in morality the way I might like), I can live with it.
John Enright –
The only answer I can come up with to your question is that the forces behind this are demonic.
God help us.
Unfortunately, many who support ESCR either don’t believe or don’t care that it’s immoral. It most certainly is and we cannot undermine the humanity of the unborn children being experimented and destroyed, but reminding the “science before morality” crowd that this supposed hopeful course of treatment is an utter failure is a good way to make the argument.
They, sadly, can ignore that it’s immoral. They can’t ignore that it’s quickly becoming obsolete.
I,I,I,I,I,I,It’s all about him. “The things that will destroy us; are politics without principles; pleasure without conscience; wealth without work; knowledge without character; business without morality; science without humanity; and worship without sacrifice.” I believe Mr. B.O.has none of these. Are we getting what we deserve?,when 54% of ‘catholics’ voted for him, when we needed every Bishop to come out on his own, to preach the TRUTH of our Catholic faith. Just askin
I wonder about the “it has not been successful” argument is really prudent. I know it’s done for tactical gains, but I think it really undercuts the real issue here. These are humans which are being experimented on. Even if it becomes successful in finding cures, it’s still immoral.
Indeed, Tzard, ultimately that’s the fundamental argument. The research is immoral and even if it did have great benefits, it could not morally and should not be done. It is an example of “the ends justify the means”, which is always a losing proposition.
Indeed, that must be our primary argument. Beyond this, however, many people object to this correct moral position, writing it off as just religion encroaching on politics. It is not, of course, and indeed, religion should and must do so, but it is easy to demonstrate that those who promote this immoral research are either in it for the money or are putting their own blind faith into it. This immoral research has not provided even the slightest hint of any kind of benefit, while perfectly moral research has been even more successful.
It is not even now, a matter of “the ends justifying the means”, because there are no seemingly good ends to such immoral research except massive amounts of money. While it cannot be the only argument, anyone with any common sense or even a hint of logical thinking can see the problem when we also use the “lack of success” argument. Sadly, common sense isn’t.
I echo John W – if he is not the demonic; he is certainly acting on Satan’s wishes, whether he knows it or not. Like Scripture says about “…only prayer and fasting…” will take out this kind – we have the weapons – and the best is Our Lady’s Rosary.