by Jennifer Brinker, St Louis Review Staff Writer
_________________
As U.S. Sen. Jim Talent from Missouri announced his decision last week to withdraw his support for a federal bill to ban human cloning, pro-life leaders in Missouri and at the national level have shown disappointment over his decision.
At the same time, the Missouri Catholic Conference, the public policy arm of the state’s bishops, is calling on the Republican senator to oppose an initiative that would constitutionally protect embryonic stem-cell research and human cloning in Missouri.
The conference’s assistant director, Mike Hoey, said that Talent’s decision to distance himself from the federal legislation and his support of a newer alternative method of stem cell research are nothing more than "a big distraction" from the constitutional amendment issue that Missouri voters will likely face on the Nov. 7 ballot.
Last week, Talent withdrew as a co-sponsor of SB 658, the Human Cloning Prohibition Act, claiming it would have a negative effect on newer technologies used in certain forms of stem-cell research.
Deacon Larry Weber, director of the Missouri Catholic Conference, called on Talent to reconsider his position on the bill.
"Pro-life Missourians expect that Senator Talent will not succumb to false statements and promises of cloning advocates, and will hold fast to his position in support of the cloning ban," Weber said.
In a speech Feb. 10 to the U.S. Senate, Talent also expressed his support for a newer method of stem-cell research called altered nuclear transfer, or ANT.
The procedure is similar to somatic cell nuclear transfer, more commonly known as therapeutic cloning, which the Church teaches is immoral. Altered nuclear transfer on a broad level creates an embryo, but it is genetically modified to prevent growth beyond an early stage.
Furthermore, a specific kind of the research, called oocyte-assisted reprogramming, has the potential to create pluripotent stem cells without creating and destroying an embryo. That theory, however, is still being debated among Catholic ethicists.
"It’s complicated — a very speculative type of technology," Hoey said of ANT. "We don’t know all of the moral ramifications of it. (Talent is) trying to use that to get out of a tight political spot."
During his speech to the Senate, Talent expressed his disapproval of somatic cell nuclear transfer, which the Church has repeatedly taught involves human cloning. (The full text of Talent’s speech can be downloaded as a PDF at talent.senate.gov/stemcell.pdf.)
"The reason SCNT is controversial is that it is a form of cloning," Talent said in his speech. "In fact, it is the same technique that was used successfully to create Dolly the sheep."
Rich Chrismer, a spokesperson for Talent, said that the senator has not taken a position on the Missouri Stem Cell Research and Cures Initiative, which would constitutionally protect somatic cell nuclear transfer and human cloning in Missouri.
"He doesn’t always take positions on state issues, and he doesn’t take positions on ballot initiatives before it’s determined if they will be on the ballot," said Chrismer.
Hoey said the Missouri Catholic Conference is asking Missouri citizens to urge Talent to oppose the ballot initiative.
"This election is bigger than Jim Talent," said Hoey. "This constitutional amendment is more important than Jim Talent."
He added a message to the senator: "If you want to come along with us and defeat this, you can — but if you don’t, we’re going to remember."
Hoey added that Talent, who is up for re-election in November against state auditor Claire McCaskill, needs to make the ballot initiative a major theme of his re-election campaign.
"He is a national (and state) leader on pro-life," said Hoey. "If he wants to exercise leadership, he’s got to make this a major theme of his re-election campaign."
Talent spokesperson Chrismer acknowledged that Talent has received some opposition from both sides of the debate on his position on the federal cloning bill and ANT. However, he added that Talent’s goal is to "strike a balance, so that we can get the stem cells that we need to relieve human suffering, without cloning or destroying an embryo."
"Senator Talent has always been opposed to human cloning and supports stem-cell research," said Chrismer. "He has made very clear that alternatives like ANT, or ANT-OAR alternatives like that, should be pursued as a way to break the stalemate that we currently face and allow us to effectively ban human cloning."
Richard Doerflinger, deputy director of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops’ Secretariat for Pro-Life Activities, said his immediate concern lies not with Talent’s support of ANT, but his decision to withdraw support of the cloning ban legislation.
"This kind of ban is what you would want to set the outer limit, so that the new technologies don’t slide over into what we all object to," said Doerflinger. "I think the ban is very carefully written."
Catholic ethicists, including Doerflinger and Father Edward Richard, MS, professor of moral theology at Kenrick-Glennon Seminary in Shrewsbury, have noted that ANT is an umbrella term, with several scientific approaches to creating pluripotent stem cells.
Father Richard said any sound Catholic would not support ANT on a general level because it still creates a human embryo that would be destroyed.
However, oocyte-assisted reprogramming has the potential to create embryonic-like stem cells without destroying human life.
"Oocyte-assisted reprogramming seems to many ethicists and scientists a very acceptable approach, because its goal is simply to make embryonic stem cells directly, without ever making an embryo," said Doerflinger.
But many Catholic ethicists and scientists are hesitant to support the method of stem-cell research, until more answers are found.
Last month, a number of scientists and ethicists, including several from Catholic backgrounds, issued a statement through the Ethics and Public Policy Center of Washington, D.C., in which they endorsed oocyte-assisted reprogramming, with the condition it would be "technically feasible." (The statement can be found at www.eppc.org/publications/pubID.2374/pub_detail.asp.) "All they’re saying is if this really never makes an embryo, this would be acceptable," said Doerflinger. The group is open to exploring the idea using animal cells.
However, Father Richard warned that oocyte-assisted reprogramming uses the same process as somatic cell nuclear transfer.
"The problem with that is it has the full complement of human genes, and the nucleus is being placed in the egg, just like you do in cloning," said Father Richard.
"And the problem is I don’t think (scientists) can prove with moral certainty that that one cell that would be produced is never a human zygote."
Doerflinger also said he was concerned with Talent’s proposal to create a competition that would create incentives for scientists to create embryonic stem cells without cloning human embryos.
"I’m not sure that’s appropriate, for one thing," said Doerflinger. "I think a race is how we got the Korean cloning scandal. And then you have this incentive to say, ‘I passed the finish line,’ even if you didn’t."
The Missouri Catholic Conference is asking Missourians to contact Talent to urge his opposition to the proposed ballot issue in Missouri that seeks to protect human cloning and embryonic stem cell research.
Talent can be reached by phone at (202) 224-6154, fax at (202) 228-1518, or on the Internet at talent.senate.gov/Contact/default.cfm.
No comments:
Post a Comment