Dr. Oz shocks Oprah and Michael J. Fox with assurance that treatment for Parkinson's will come through ethical stem-cell research.

Say "NO"to Cloning!

Update: November 7, 2006 was a sad day in Missouri history.
The Missouri Stem Cell Initiative passed. May God be merciful on us all for this travesty.

Christians need to step up to the plate and knock down efforts to allow human cloning for stem cell research. All in the name of science and cures, human embryos, tiny little human lives, will be created to be killed for their stem cells.

November 2006 the cloning battleground will be Missouri.

Why you should vote NO on Amendment 2, known as the "Missouri Stem Cell Research and Cures Initiative"

Exhortation from Sarah Macomber

View the proposed amendment.

Stem Cell Research Information Page

The Stem Cell Hoax - Learn the truth about Amendment 2

Pro Embryonic Stem Cell forces are rallying. Local TV stations are airing ads, back to back, for The Missouri Coalition for Lifesaving Cures.

The proponents would have us believe, among other things, that the stem cell initiative will ban human cloning or attempted cloning.

BUT...the embryos that will be created-to-destoy for stem cells are the product of Somatic Cell Nuclear Transfer (SCNT), the same process that produced Dolly the sheep.

We are being lied to, folks. The process used to create embryos IS cloning - the goal is to intentionally create human life to kill it for research.

This Missouri proposal isn't the first of its kind, by any means. Its merely the LIE being repeated in a different state, for the same self-serving reasons.

Please see: A Case of Double-Speak: An Answer to Senator Dianne Feinstein

Its not surprising to see the research industry going to such great lengths to promote embryonic stem cell research...the profit potential is huge.

What is truly saddening is to see folks like Reverend Emanuel Cleaver III, pastor of the Centennial United Methodist Church (and son of Missouri Congressman and former Kansas City mayor, Emanuel Cleaver II), being drawn into endorsing this initiative.

Rev. Cleaver isn't the only clergy involved in the wrong side of the issue.

Senator John C. Danforth (Former U.S. Senator for Missouri) Episcopal Minister
Honorary Co-Chair, Missouri Coalition for Lifesaving Cures

What are they thinking? Our church leaders, indeed, all Christians, should be standing united against creating human life for destruction in the name of research.

If you would like to contact Reverend Emanuel Cleaver III, the information is:

Centennial United Methodist Church
1834 Woodland Ave
Kansas City, MO 64108
(816) 421-5527

Christian Soldiers asked Missouri Senator Jim Talent what his position was on the issue.

Sen. Talent's reply is as follows:

Friday, September 15, 2006 Dear Mr. Macomber: Thank you for contacting me to discuss human cloning and stem cell research.  I appreciate the time you have taken to share your views with me and I welcome the opportunity to respond. I am opposed to cloning human life, including human embryos.  The only reason to clone people is to use them as an instrument for some other purpose.  I also support medical research, including stem cell research. The reason this issue is difficult is that there is an area of overlap between cloning and stem cells.  Some scientists believe that stem cells from a cloned human embryo may have unique advantages for medical research.  I think it is too early to say that there is no value to pluripotent stem cell research in general, so long as it does not harm or clone human embryos.  Only in the last few months has the newest medical research shown that there are alternatives available.  The advance of these alternatives has been widely reported precisely because it signals the end of the ethical dilemma in this area of research; the alternatives suggest that science may soon be able to get this special kind of stem cell-patient specific pluripotent stem cells-without cloning, creating, or harming a human embryo. One such alternative that could allow us to get pluripotent stem cells without cloning or harming a human embryo is Altered Nuclear Transfer (ANT).   Alternatives like ANT are endorsed by the former Chairman of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops Committee on Doctrine, the President's Council on Bioethics and dozens of pro life ethicists and scientists around the country.  Another pro life alternative is direct reprogramming of adult stem cells into pluripotent stem cells.   For all of these reasons, I voted enthusiastically for the alternative approaches and the prohibition against fetus farms in the Senate.  I voted against H.R. 810, which uses tax dollars to fund research that requires the destruction of human life at its earliest stages. The Federal Government has never funded such research before, and that is not a line I wish to cross - especially since, as the alternatives show, it is possible to fund every type of stem cell research without cloning or destroying human embryos.  As you know, one of the difficulties with this issue is that much depends on understanding at least the basics of the science involved, and the science is complicated.  Enclosed please find a complete copy of my speech on this issue.  I encourage you to take the time to read it.  I would be interested in your comments.  Again, thank you for contacting me.  If I may be of further assistance, please don't hesitate to call or write. If you would like to contact me via e-mail, please visit http://talent.senate.gov/Contact/default.cfm Sincerely, Senator Jim Talent

Excerpt from Sen. Talent's speech referenced above:

Remember, Mr. President, with Somatic Cell Nuclear Transfer researchers would take the genetic material out of a human egg, replace it with the complete genetic code of the donor, and then shock it so that it starts to divide. In theory, an organism created in such a way—artificially rather than naturally—could divide and grow until it became an adult human being. Altered Nuclear Transfer is a form of somatic cell nuclear transfer in that it uses nuclear transfer but with a preemptive alteration of the genetic material. To put it simply, the somatic cell is altered prior to being transferred. The resultant entity would be capable of producing pluripotent stem cells but because of the preemptive alterations during the transfer process it would be incapable, from its creation, of the organization and developmental potential that are the defining characteristics of an embryo. Altered Nuclear Transfer is a broad umbrella concept with many possible specific approaches. For example, one proposed approach using ANT is called ANT-OAR. This form of ANT involves reprogramming the somatic cell to enter directly into a pluripotent stem cell state, without going through any of the normal developmental stages. All of this means that ANT could create genetically matched stem cells without ever having to produce anything with the capacity to be considered a human embryo. This distinction between SCNT and ANT is vital from a moral and legal perspective. Until the last few months, everyone has assumed that nuclear transfer which was successful in generating pluripotent stem cells must first have created a human embryo. The entity which ANT could create would produce pluripotent stem cells from a laboratory-constructed cellular source lacking the developmental potential of a human embryo. In laymen’ s terms, the entity which ANT would create could only develop for a few days and would then “ close down.” ANT thus transcends the moral dilemma which has heretofore prevented any legislation from passing. It renders moot the question of whether human life begins at creation or implantation of an embryo since the entity that ANT could create would not have at its inception the organizational and developmental capability to be considered a human life. Further exploration of the ANT proposal already has the support of a long list of scientists and ethicists and religious leaders, including the Former Chairman of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops Committee on Doctrine.

Christian Soldiers is reserving judgement on the validity of the contention that transmuting embryonic structure from the natural to an altered state is, indeed, moral.

A very real problem exists, apart from the creation of human life for the purpose of scientific study, and that is the impact that cloning will have on women. Those eggs have to come from somewhere and there will be a cost to the providers!

See:
Ethicists and biologists ponder the price of eggs

Health effects of egg donation may take decades to emerge

For more information on Altered Nuclear Transfer, see http://www.alterednucleartransfer.com .

Christian Soldiers also sent an email inquiry to Representative and Senatorial candidate Wes Shoemyer. No reply has been received, however, we were able to speak to Rep. Shoemyer personally, and he was happy to give us his views on the issue of Embryonic Stem Cell research.

While Rep. Shoemyer is pro-life, he does not grasp the concept that the embryos created through the SCNT process are fully human. Shoemyer's narrow scope only allows him to view conception resulting from sperm/egg union as human life.

Rep. Shoemyer comes across as a very nice fellow, and undoubtedly is so, but he appears to be more of a talker than a listener, unfortunately.

We pray that Rep. Shoemyer will realize the error of his evaluation of this critical pro-life issue and join us in our campaign to defeat passage of Amendment 2.

An important message to Missouri residents from the American Center for Law and Justice It is vitally important for you to understand a proposal to amend the state constitution of Missouri, the "Missouri Stem Cell Research and Cures Initiative," that will be before the state's electorate this fall.  Whether it is by design or by effect, the name of this proposed initiative is misleading. As a Missouri voter, you have the right to know the full scope and the profound deceptions found in the Missouri cloning initiative - before you cast your vote. This initiative does not ban human cloning (the process of creating a new human organism by the appropriation of the entire genetic complement of a cell from another human being).  It bans only the implantation into a uterus of cloned human beings. This initiative affirmatively authorizes human cloning.  It defines stem cell research by what is "permitted" under federal law - which includes cloning human beings to harvest their stem cells. This initiative requires the killing of cloned human beings.  Rather than prevent the cloning of human beings, a "clone-and-kill" law allows cloning but forbids survival of cloned humans. The initiative permits the buying and selling of human eggs, sperm, and human embryos.  It purports to ban the purchase or sale of human eggs and blastocysts (very early-stage human organisms) - but excludes the purchase by the donor of human eggs or sperm by a fertilization clinic or sperm bank that can restructure the financial transaction for their gain. The initiative bans civil remedies for individuals coerced or deceived into surrendering their eggs or early stage children.  It declares that human blastocysts and eggs "obtained for stem cell research must be donated with voluntary and informed consent, documented in writing."  However, the initiative imposes no criminal penalties for a violation of this provision. The initiative allows the fertilization of extra embryos in vitro for stem cell research.  It says it bans the fertilization of human beings "solely for the purpose of stem cell research" - BUT, when a fertility clinic conducts in vitro procedures for customers desiring a child, it may produce "extra" human embryos to use for stem cell research. The reporting requirements of the initiative are extremely weak.  The initiative technically requires an annual report from any entity or person conducting human embryonic stem cell research.  However, the initiative imposes no criminal or civil penalties for noncompliance. Our ACLJ Senior Counsel assembled this eye-opening analysis to expose the deceptiveness of this proposed Missouri initiative. Please pass this information on to others so that they, too, may gain better understanding of the Missouri Stem Cell Research and Cures Initiative.

The following is a recent inquiry to and response from Rev. Cleaver:

----- Original Message ----- From: Christian Soldier To: pastorec3@kc.rr.com Sent: Friday, October 06, 2006 12:43 AM Subject: Missouri Stem Cell Initiative Dear Rev. Cleaver,  I have recently viewed an advertisement promoting a 'Yes' vote for the Missouri Stem Cell Initiative, in which you appear, endorsing the proposed amendment to the Missouri constitution.  As I have mentioned you by name in a commentary I have written at Christian Soldiers, specifically at http://christiansoldiers.real-estate-investors-resource.com/no_cloning.php, I thought it only fair and proper to give you an opportunity to clarify your position on this issue, for the benefit of our ministry visitors.  I look forward to your reply.  In Christ,  Bruce W. Macomber http://christiansoldiers.real-estate-investors-resource.com Rev. Cleaver replied as follows:  ----- Original Message ----- From: pastorec3@kc.rr.com To: Christian Soldier Sent: Friday, October 06, 2006 11:32 AM Subject: Re: Missouri Stem Cell Initiative First of all I am not the former mayor.  Secondly, lives are not being created to be destroyed.  That is simply not true.  Finally, The initative clearly states that cloning will be prohibited. A follow-up email has been dispatched:  ----- Original Message ----- From: Christian Soldier To: pastorec3@kc.rr.com Sent: Saturday, October 07, 2006 12:17 AM Subject: Re: Missouri Stem Cell Initiative Dear Rev. Cleaver, Thank you for your reply, such as it is.  >>First of all I am not the former mayor.  I apologize for the confusion of identity between your father and yourself. The web information has been corrected.  >>Secondly, lives are not being created to be destroyed.  That is simply not true.  Rev. Cleaver, you have either been misinformed or have misunderstood what you are endorsing, or you are a willing participant in the distribution of misleading information. The process, Somatic Cell Nuclear Transfer (SCNT), produces, in the laboratory, a viable human embryo, every bit as human as a naturally conceived embryo.  >>Finally, The initiative clearly states that cloning will be prohibited.  The initiative is anything but clear, and purposefully so. The prohibition is for the implantation of the embryo in a womb, where it most certainly would develop into a full-term cloned baby. Of course, the purpose of creating the cloned embryo is to destroy it for the stem cells.  The Word of God is very clear about the sanctity of human life. I would ask that you pray long and hard on this issue, which certainly deserves more than the four sentences you have mustered as a response to my initial email.  I await your reply.  In Christ,  Bruce W. Macomber http://christiansoldiers.real-estate-investors-resource.com

UPDATE: OCTOBER 19, 2006

It seems that Rev.Cleaver has opted not to explain why a man of the cloth would promote this reprehensible attempt to Amend the Constitution of Missouri to allow such heinous research, which has been presented to the voting public in such a disturbingly dishonest manner. What could his motives be?

Related resources:

What is cloning?

A must read

Joni Eareckson Tada, inspirational quadriplegic Christian and Nigel Cameron, bioethicist, present an indepth look at human cloning and the issues surrounding the topic, as well as dealing with these issues from a Christian perspective.

How to Be a Christian in a Brave New World
by Joni Eareckson Tada and Nigel M. de S. Cameron

 

 

 

 

A Focus on the Family Position Statement