Missourians: Say NO to Constitutional Amendment 2!
By ScottS Posted in 2006 | Spotlight Blogs — Comments (14) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
On Tuesday, Nov. 7, 2006, Missourians have a very serious decision to make, to vote yes or NO on the Constitutional Amendment 2. Watch this TV ad from Missourians Against Human Cloning. Here is a link to the Ballot Language and the Amendment Language.
Read on . . .
I am an Illinoisan and I am very concerned that if this passes in Missouri, you can almost bet that other states will try to do it, especially Illinois. Just look at our Senators, Richard J. Durbin and Barack Obama (God Help Us), I think either one of these guy’s would try to get it done in the Illinois Constitution.
Here is a Press Release by Cathy Ruse at Missourians Against Human Cloning.
October 17, 2006 (ST. LOUIS) Already the biotech special interests behind the deception that is Amendment 2 have spent $30 million; it’s an attempt to buy an amendment to the Missouri Constitution. They’ve spent such enormous money
because Amendment 2 is an attempt to deceive the people of Missouri into actually
writing the practice of human cloning into the Missouri Constitution. Amendment 2 is
a deception, page one says it bans human cloning, but the fine print later on reveals
it allows for “Somatic Cell Nuclear Transfer,” which is the scientific definition for
cloning and the very method used for cloning Dolly the Sheep. Amendment 2 is
really a cloning amendment. The biotech special interests have committed to
spending whatever it takes because the amendment is so deceptive, the smoking
gun language that proves it’s actually a cloning amendment won’t be on the ballot
which just has a summary. In reality, Amendment 2 is actually five pages long but
the public will not get to see all the fine print on the ballot.
I have been reading about this over the last couple of weeks at Towhall.com and then I heard about in on The World Over Live, it is on EWTN Friday nights at 8:00 pm EST Dish Network Channel 263 and DirectTV Channel 422.
Here are some articles from www.Townhall.com I recommend reading also:
A Matter of Conscience
The Exploitation of the Egg
Missouri: Gateway to Human Cloning
Please contact any one you know in Missouri and tell them to vote NO on the Constitutional Amendment 2 or go to there www.NoCloning.org website to Get Involved or Donate. Most important: PRAY that our country becomes PRO-LIFE.
and I've got the sign in my front yard.
With all respect, stem cell research is not cloning. I'm not even sure it should be considered a "pro-life" issue because the embryonic stem cells being used for scientific research are cells that would have otherwise been discarded.
Yeah, and Josef Mengele did experiments on people who would otherwise have been gassed.
--
If you're seeing shades of gray, it's because you're not looking close enough to see the black and white dots.
that scientists who work in stem cell research are Nazis?
LOL
Your use of nasty rhetoric doesn't change the facts Neil.
Stem cell research is valid science that may well revolutionize modern medical practice. Missourians should vote Yes on 2 to keep the corporate R&D dollars flowing to research centers in this state. Not only is it good science, it's good business.
It means that you can't use ONE thing you PLAN to do to human life, to justify another thing you plan to do.
You can't use a planned execution to justify experiments, you can't use a murder to justify the rape beforehand, and you can't use the planned 'destruction' of embryos to justify creating an assembly line for their use in cloning and experimentation.
--
If you're seeing shades of gray, it's because you're not looking close enough to see the black and white dots.
Even if your rape/murder analogy was correct, in the current state of affairs, abortion itself is legal, which deals with much more developed humans than embryos. Comparing stem cell research to Nazi genocide only weakens your pro-life arguments in the eyes of that majority of Americans who want abortion kept legal. The fight to stop abortion is hard enough as it is without incorporating fringe arguments as well.
Who brought up abortion?
--
If you're seeing shades of gray, it's because you're not looking close enough to see the black and white dots.
That's no answer. You replied to ME, not to ScottS.
--
If you're seeing shades of gray, it's because you're not looking close enough to see the black and white dots.
can dedicate as much of their R&D budgets to embryonic stem cell research as they dare. They can even use federal funding to conduct embryonic stem cell research.... as long as they agree to limit said research to federally-approved, existing stem cell lines.
However, vast sums of corporate and private R&D dollars are currently invested in adult stem cell/umbilical cord research, and there are numerous clinical trials already in progress.
***
"The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so." - Ronald Reagan
because it would seem more efficient to pay women who seek abortions to have the babies which could then be raised in controlled environments until such time as their organs were sufficiently mature for harvest and transplant.
It would be important not employ this method with women in poor neighborhoods to prevent the parted out carcases winding up on concrete blocks in the front yards.
Of course, cloning for one's own replacement organs and tissue would be even better provided one was willing to invest in the clone's maintenance until needed.
Envisioning when all that is Left is the Right.
Have some of you actually read the amendment language? To the others, I don’t think we need to be comparing this to the Nazi’s. I think we need to debate the issues on content.
I would agree with Christopher that we CAN use federal funding for Adult and Umbilical cord stem cell research because it is not endangering the life of the donor. Corporations and Venture Capitalist have been providing R&D dollars for the research of stem cells. I don't have problem with that. My concern is that we should not be taking the life of the donor, i.e. the embryo, to get the actual material for research. Why do we need to take the life of an innocent human being for the benefit of others? I DO NOT approve of any federal funding of embryonic stem cell research, although (not happy about it) as noted above by rbdwiggins, it was approved by President Bush for an existing line of embryonic stem cell line provided by the in vitro fertilization process.
We have to be very careful about what this document actually says. I am afraid this is going to be an amendment that provides unlimited funding of embryonic stem cell and cloning research.
Currently, there are NO known benefits from embryonic stem cell research, but there are roughly 72 know benefits for adult or umbilical cord stem cell research. Here is a link for the comparison of the two. At least go to www.nocloning.org to do some more research. Don't go into this one-sided and from what you hear in the media, you may live to
regret it. Please become more educated about this topic before you go vote.
Here are some quote / definitions from amendment language (emphasis is mine):
Page 3
"Blastocyst" means a small mass of cells that results from cell division caused either by fertilization or somatic cell nuclear transfer, that has not been implanted in a uterus.
"Clone or attempt to clone a human being" means to implant in a uterus or attempt to implant in a uterus anything other than the product of fertilization of an egg of a human
female by a sperm of a human male for the purpose of initiating a pregnancy that could result in the creation of a human fetus, or the birth of a human being.
"Donated" means donated for use in connection either with scientific or medical research or with medical treatment.
Page 4
"Solely for the purpose of stem cell research" means PRODUCING human Blastocyst used in vitro fertilization EXCLUSIVELY for stem cell research,
but does not include producing any number of human Blastocyst for the purpose of treating of human infertility
"Valuable consideration" means financial gain or advantage, but does not include reimbursement for reasonable costs incurred in connection with the removal, processing,
disposal, preservation, quality control, storage, transfer, or donation of human eggs, sperm, or Blastocyst, including lost wages of the donor. Valuable consideration also does not include the
consideration paid to a donor of human eggs or sperm by a fertilization clinic or sperm bank, as well as any other consideration expressly allowed by federal law.
I voted against an initiative in California that would provide funding for embyronic stem cell research. It passed just 59%-40% even in liberal-leaning California. If I'm not mistaken there were polls showing it passing by a much greater margin. That's why Missourians shouldn't give up on voting against this amendment.