QUICK LINKS
Stem Cell Research
Jon Russell, our Senior Field Director and lobbyist testified earlier today in Olympia expressing that we strongly oppose embryonic stem cell research.
The reason for our opposition is simple. We value life and an embryo is a life.
Jon told me the lawmakers are looking to take the tobacco money they have received from settlements and create a stem cell research fund. They are calling it Life Science Fund.
There are at least four bills dealing with stem cells on the agenda. They are H.B. 1163, H.B. 1732, H.B. 1336, and H.B. 1730.
Would you take a moment and contact your representatives and tell them you strongly oppose these bills because you are pro-life.
This is very important over the next few days.
Also, we have provided a concise position paper on why we oppose stem cell research.
The piece was given as "The Other Side" of the issue on National Public Radio by Robert P. George. Mr. George is a member of the President's Council on bio-ethics. He is also a professor of jurisprudence and director of the James Madison Program in American Ideals and Intuitions at Princeton University.
I strongly encourage you to read this. Click here for article.
Click here to vote in the new FFN Opinion Poll.
___________________
Gary Randall
President
Faith & Freedom
Click here to add these blogs to you email inbox.
34 Comments:
This post has been removed by the author.
Let me try this again. The lie behind FFN's stem cell position is at Blackwhite.
Andrew,
I assume you are the same person as Andy at blackwhite. If my assumption is incorrect I apologize. Since you are obviously agreeing to the blacwhite post, my comments below (except for perhaps #3) still applies:
1) It doesn’t follow that if one doesn’t comment on “A” (in vitro fertilization) that they cannot make a moral assessment on “B” (government funding for stem cell research).
2) You claim that “By opposing stem cell research, Mr. Randall and FFN are seeking deny million of human beings treatments that could cure them of their various ailments>” It is a scientific fact that the uniting of a human sperm and a human egg creates a unique human being. Therefore, you are saying it is okay to destroy some human beings in order to cure millions of others. You are advocating the ideology that “some life is unworthy of life” which was held by the Nazi’s. The only difference is you don’t apply it to Jews, at least not those who have passed beyond the birth canal.
3) You criticize FFN for wanting ” the ability to control and regulate the lives of others.” Yet, you are a self-proclaimed “socialist” who advocates (and these are the exact words of Andrew Heyman) “that a society that is governed by, and serves the needs of the people best.” So you have no problem with controlling and regulating the lives of others as long as it is your ideology doing it.
Larry Rambousek
Homosexual Ministries:
Exodus International Ministries
www.exodus-international.org
Metanoia Ministries
www.metanoiaonline.org
Tower of Light Ministries
www.nsb.org (click "Ministries")
I think you meant some anti-homosexual ministries.
BTW: "Tower of Light" - anyone really think she's "cured"?
Larry,
The fact is that IVF destroys way more children (if we accept the premise that the cell created at conception is the same as a human being) than any embryonic blastocyst research ever could. Yet the mostly theocratic "pro-life" movement ignores it almost completely (in context of any organized opposition).
To use your Nazi analogy, it is like saying that research on concentration camp victims was wrong, but exterminating them in the gas chamber was fine.
IVF and embryonic stem cell research are share an unbreakable link, since IVF embryos are where we get the blastocysts. So I am hardly comparing apples to oranges in demanding some kind of consistency from those who actively oppose, and organize against, embryonic stem cell research.
As to the hypocrisy of comments I made about Randall and other theocrats seeking "the ability to control and regulate the lives of others," while advocating socialism, which you contend means that I want to "control and regulate" others; that just isn't true in the sense that you meant it, unless of course you advocate a complete overthrow of all authoritarian systems and institutions (anarchy). I doubt that either you or I advocate such a society, and that we agree that there should be some authrority to protect society from those who would harm it. We just differ on where that aurhtority shoud be exercised
I am not a Marxist, Leninist, Stalinist, or Trotskyist. By socialist, I mean a society that works towards the common good and welfare, instead of the betterment of a few elites who exert tremndous control over government and law.
Larry,
I think Andrew is bringing up a good point - though you bring up a good point as well (It doesn’t follow that if one doesn’t comment on “A” (in vitro fertilization) that they cannot make a moral assessment on “B” (government funding for stem cell research).)
It does seem inconsistent to not mention IVF - why would we focus on the one and ignore the other?? It seems some more thought is warranted here.
Sincerely,
In Christ,
Human
I cannot understand why ANYONE would support embryonic stem cell research which has ZERO cures so far, instead of adult stem cell cures which has over 70 amazing cures so far.
It just seems logical to me to support research in proven areas, while at the same time protecting lives since that does not appear to be a promising source of cures anyway.
Seems more like a get rich scheme for pharmacuetical companies and a political football for the elites to pull the uninformed around with.
Anon 2:14
Could you provide some sources for your statements - they sound intriguing.
Thanks,
Human
Human, its just another game of 'Telegraph'. There are 70 conditions where stem cell research might be the key to finding cures, there aren't 70 cures currently existing.
And the issue is that adult stem cells are always partially differentiated. For example one get get from skin might be able to be teased into becoming a different type of epithelial cell but but it couldn't become a muscle cell or nerve cell. Embryonic cells (collected from 150 cell blastocytes) are the true stem cells being able to become any cell line in the body.
Research in both is necessary and one can not substitute for the other.
So anon, care to name just seven of those 70 amazing cures you claim? Surely if they are so amazing you will be aware of what they actually are, of course I'm guessing you just got the number from some talking points somewhere and are dutifully reguritating it here.
Anon 2:14
Right now it appears your integrity is on the line - if you are a disciple of Jesus, I trust you will step up with the truth.
Thanks,
In Him,
Human
Uhhhh no not quite Human. Your posts do nothing to question that post's integrity. It just shows they don't hang out on here and post again and again like you do. And it would put your integrity on the line--except your integrity and credibility have already been discredited.
Father, I pray for Anon 5:03 that you would expose the evil, lying, fornicating spirit that fills his heart and set him free from both the sin that allows this evil to harbor in his soul and from the energizings that speak out of his mouth. I agree with the other genuine disciples on this blog for his freedom that he may truly worship and fellowship with You and with Your Son, the Lord of Glory, Jesus Christ.
In the name of Jesus we agree together touching this matter and we thank you for your grace.
Amen.
Human you sound totally psycho. You have already established yourself as evil and a fraud.
Quit your game playing. We all know you are not a Christian.
No one is evil on here except you and you know it very well.
Lots of name calling, anon, but I'm still waiting for you to name just 7 of your claimed 70 "amazing cures" attributable to adult stem cell research.
Of course I sound psycho - until you meet the Creator through His Son Jesus Christ, I will seem very strange indeed - doing things like talking God - weird isn't it - praying for your enemies - how odd is that??? - guy must be demon possessed....what strange teaching could he be following???
"Non-embryonic (or adult) stem cells are readily available in sources such as bone marrow, umbilical cord blood, the pancreas and brain, and no lives are lost in the collection process. Currently, more than 70 identified diseases and disabilities that are treatable using non-embryonic stem cells, including breast cancer, leukemia and sickle cell anemia. 1 Researchers also have successfully treated patients with Parkinson’s disease, multiple sclerosis, heart damage and spinal cord injuries using non-embryonic stem cell sources. "
Acute Myloid Leukemia – Sixteen-year-old Nathan Salley is alive today, thanks to stem cells from umbilical cord blood. Nathan told a congressional subcommittee, "I am living proof that there are promising and useful alternatives to embryonic stem cell research. . . . Embryonic stem cell research did not save me – cord blood research did."2
Diabetes – Eleven out of 15 Type 1 diabetes patients are "completely off insulin" after receiving adult pancreatic cell transplants.3
Diabetes – Researchers at Harvard Medical School used animal adult stem cells to grow new islet cells to combat diabetes. Researcher Denise Faustman recalled, "It was astonishing! We had reversed the disease without the need for transplants." Plans for human trials are underway.4
Heart Disease – German heart specialist Bodo Eckehard Strauer successfully treated a heart patient using stem cells from the man's bone marrow: "Even patients with the most seriously damaged hearts can be treated with their own stem cells instead of waiting and hoping on a transplant," Dr. Strauer explained.5
1National Marrow Donor Program, "Diseases Treatable by Stem Cell Transplant," National Marrow Donor Program
2"Teenager testifies he's ‘living proof' of stem-cell option, Denver Post, July 22, 2001.
3 "Cell grafts lend freedom to diabetics," Medical Post, June 19, 2001.
4"Adult stem cells effect a cure," Harvard University Gazette, July 19, 2001.
5"Stem cell therapy repairs a heart," Daily Telegraph (London), Aug. 25, 2001.
3&4 are the same "cure", that leaves you with three to go to arrive at 7. Or shall we just agree that you hadn't a clue what any of them were when you posted, and are in fact just regurgitating talking points?
Are you using new "creative math?"
1. Breast cancer
2. leukemia
3. Sickle Cell Anemia
4. Parkinson's
5. MS
6. Heart Damage
7. Spinal Cord injuries
Your turn to come up with even one cure for embryonic stem cells
I would say that is a fair proposition.
However, in complete fairness, I would like to review some professional commentary concerning the specific cures identified above - ("trust but verify").
Admittedly, I would like to then see the same care and sensitivity to living, peaceful human beings rather than the advocacy of violence and oppression against them. Then I would feel like we making genuine progress because we would be manifesting that we held a genuine position of truth and the value/dignity of humanity.
Sincerely,
Human
Well just for the sake of accuracy I will point out that all hematological treatments CAN be done with adult stem cells - that's what they've been inadvertently doing with bone marrow transplants for the last 40 years with umbilical cord blood being basically like liquid bone marrow.
The others, not so much. I did find the article that the cut and paste with footnotes came from and the paster would do well to actually research the claims.
As yet no one has successfully treated a human diabetic with stem cell replacement though a company just recently announced some cell lines from embryonic stem cells that might work. The Harvard researcher who made her rat claim in 2001 has not been able to translate it into similar results in humans.
The heart damage claim is challenged and the recovery doesn't seem to be due to stem cells at all since the tissue regeneration is many magnitudes larger than the number of stem cells added. It may be just injecting organic material is activating the bodies own repair mechanisms, stem cells being possibly superfluous.
And embryonic stem cell research has only been going on for 9 years with deliberately crippled access to variant cell lines here in the US. The jury really is still out on which will ultimately prove more useful. Common sense would tell you that a cell line that can be transformed into any cell might have uses that cell lines that can only be transformed into limited cell lines do not. Time will tell but we really do have to give it time and not preemptively decide it won't work when we really know no such thing.
An interesting question -
The Evangelical Right is quick to applaud young men and women who give their lives for their "country", etc. Why would they appalled at these young humans giving their lives for the good of man-kind?
Interesting thought...
Anon, not a single disease you list has a cure, let alone an "amazing cure" due to adult stem cell research.
Amazing that the left, instead of being happy of all the great advances in adult stem cell research, are not championing this wonderful area.
But, the real question is, why should the federal government support ANY research? The patent system was developed to reward those who venture out trying to develope new things. The government is only supposed to "promote" the general welfare, not "provide" it, according to our Constitution.
The area of research and developement is the playgroung of the rich, and the government should, while encouraging it, NOT FUND any of it.
Anon 10:59
With all due respect, your statement does not make sense - it is trifling with words.
Anon at 10:59 your post makes perfect sense.
Dear Human,
Interesting question, indeed.....
No one is holding a surgical tool poised to extract DNA and end the lives of the brave people who serve our country. Why not let these potential and peaceful embryonic human beings arrive alive at 18 years of age, and give them a choice of offering their lives for research?
Mimi,
Without willing fertile female hosts these "peaceful embryonic human beings" may arrive at the age of 18 years, but they will still be just "peaceful embryonic human beings", so I don't see what difference it would make. This isistence of anti ESCR folks to speak of these embryos as if they were developing humans, who were it not for those evil scientists would one day walk amoung us is extremely dishonest. Not that dishonesty has every slowed the FFN crowd.
Amazing that the right, instead of being happy of all the great advances in stem cell research, are not championing the entirety of wonderful area.
As to the government not funding research, one might ask why it licenses marriage contracts too. These 'pie in the sky' speculations that depend on a total alternate reality suddenly being in place really don't further any productive discussion, do they?
Mimi,
Your question has some merit - I would suggest that a lot of those 18 yos are much less voluntary than you would give them credit for. Most are duped to some extent and needy.
Sincerely,
In Christ,
Human
...and don't forget THE DRAFT
It was non-consensual.
Makes you wonder why the Dems keep bringing the DRAFT back up, huh?
Gee, I don't know, do you think it might have something to do with Bush threatening a third war with the military already overextened?
Of course, if the yellow elepahant war supporters actually signed up for this war that they claim is oh so important to the future of civilization itsself, rather than just supporting the war by attacking anyone who dares to question Dear Leader, that wouldn't be an issue.
Post a Comment
<< Home