Stem Cell Initiative

[astegallrnc]

This might be helpful–this is from the actual ballot language:…
All of this is from sos.mo.gov/elections/2006petitions/ppStemCell.asp Project Vote Smart

This is the actual Amendment but it is my understanding this IS NOT what will be on the ballot. Please, please, please visit the link and read the amendment.

This is a critique of the ballot:
moroundtable.org/index.html

I believe this is what will be on the ballot, which fails to include important information.

Constitutional Amendment 2
A “yes” vote will amend the Missouri Constitution to allow and set limitations on stem cell research, therapies, and cures which will:

• ensure Missouri patients have access to any therapies and cures, and allow Missouri researchers to conduct any research, permitted under federal law;
• ban human cloning or attempted cloning;
• require expert medical and public oversight and annual reports on the nature and purpose of any stem cell research;
• impose criminal and civil penalties for any violations; and
• prohibit state or local governments from preventing or discouraging lawful research, therapies and cures.
  A “no” vote would not ensure that stem cell research permitted under federal law is allowed to be conducted in Missouri and that Missouri patients have access to stem cell therapies and cures permitted under federal law.
  This measure will have no impact on taxes.

sos.mo.gov/elections/2006ballot/fbl.asp

 

[Ridgerunner]

Not to belabor the “Macbeth” reference, but Macbeth’s undoing began with the deception of the witches. First, a lie combined with a temptation to murder. Then murder. Then becoming accustomed to murder. Then refusal to repent. Horrible.

 

[aurora77]

This is the actual Amendment but it is my understanding this IS NOT what will be on the ballot. Please, please, please visit the link and read the amendment.

Sorry, I misspoke. That was from the full text of the amendment, not the ballot language.

 

[hasikelee]

You ask very good questions faith 1960

Hasikelee’ reply is very misleading and condescending to
those who have well educated,well reasoned, ethical opinions
supporting amendment 2

His posting is an opinion and not
“basic medical and scientific knowledge”

And that becomes obvious when Hasiklee suggests the possibility of Human cloning because of Dolly the Sheep.

Amendment 2 prohibits human cloning. It states

(1) No person may clone or attempt to clone
a human being.

If you want a good web site go to

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stem_cell_research

Wisdom, to not accept factual science because a certain person or source is talking about it is not a well-educated, well-reasoned behavior. Another name for this irrational behavior is a fallacy

My post was to point out how to guide others to critical thinking and reasoning. This is helpful for all people, regardless of the ultimate conclusion.

The facts of science in this case are basic knowledge accepted by the medical and scientific community at large. If you take biology 101 in highschool you can find all of the facts in the textbook.

You say that Amendment 2 bans cloning. Yet the medical and scientific community defines SCNT as cloning. In fact, Dolly the Sheep was cloned by the technique called SCNT. There isn’t a prolife “link” for this information; it’s basic knowledge that everyone knows—or rather should know. Just as everyone should know how to count and add 2+2=4. If SCNT is not cloning, how did Dolly the sheep exist? Are you going to dismiss a real, live creature documented by millions of people, prolife or not prolife?

Another example, if someone came up to me and said they believe the sky is green, I have no prolife source for them. They aren’t lacking in unbiased sources, they are lacking in critical thinking skills.

By my post, it was not my intention to degrade anyone else’s opinion or view of Amendment 2. I think you know that and decided to ignore my message offering helpful ideas on how to engage in deeper dialogue with those who disagree.

The ability to research, process information and gain knowledge is an important factor to making educated decisions in life.

 

[astegallrnc]

Sorry, I misspoke. That was from the full text of the amendment, not the ballot language.

aurora77, no apologies. Those responsible for the language on the ballot should apologize. The language on the ballot makes me so angry!

I just want to encourage Missourians to read the Amendment before Tuesday.

Take care and God bless!
Autumn

 

[aurora77]

I just want to encourage Missourians to read the Amendment before Tuesday.

Absolutely! Everyone needs to read exactly what we’re voting on. We got an excellent handout in our bulletin at Mass yesterday, detailing what’s actually in the amendment, with commentary on what it really means. Very chilling. I’m hoping other Catholic churches got the same thing.

 

[manualman]

How disheartening to hear even some catholics have fallen for the culture of death. When the sperm combines with an egg, a new life with its own unique lifelong DNA is formed. It is a human person, not a part of either parent anymore. It is dependent on mommy, but not part of her body.

What embryonic stem cell research is is nothing more than human farming. It is the creation of new tiny human beings (or the callous use of existing ones) for the sole purpose of growing to the point where potentially useful cells can be harvested and the person killed. SURE, this could be useful. But why not take it further? Why not just grow the human being until WHOLE organs are viable? Why not open organ centers where poor women are gainfully employed as incubators, babies are raised until their organs are mature and then harvest the organs? After all, they aren’t human since they were never WANTED by their moms, right? Isn’t that the pro-choice criteria for personhood?

It comes down to this question. Where does life begin? Science, religion and philosophy cannot point to ANY point other than conception for a defensible answer. Even the irreligious ought to pause and wonder if this convergence of thought doesn’t have MAJOR significance!

And any literate person ought to be able to see the bait and switch redefinition of the word ‘cloning’ going on in the amendment. They’ve defined it as reproductive only. But they redefine ‘somatic cell nuclear transfer’ as something NOT cloning when done only for research or theraputic reasons. Trouble is that somatic cell nuclear transfer is the DEFINITION of the only known viable method for cloning. It is the EXACT same somantic trick used by abortion lobbiests when they tried to redefine ‘pregnancy’ as beginning at implantation instead of conception. That way they didn’t have to call the morning after pill ‘abortifacient!’ Worked once, might as well use it again!

 

[cathgal]

Fr. Groeschel has a show yesterday on the Missouri Amendment 2 on EWTN. Very enlightening. It talked about how deceptive the amendment is. The show will be aired again on Nov. 11, 5pm ET.

For more information go to
www.bdfund.org

 

[Neo_Canaan]

Stem cell work is the work of The Devil.