Stem Cell Scam

Pro-life supporters know Pres Obama is no friend of the unborn. Whether it is his support for a Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA) or his rejection of the Born Alive Infant Protection Act (BAIPA) while Illinois senator, our president’s lack of concern for those still in the womb is clear. So it was no surprise when on Monday, March 9, 2009, he signed an executive order lifting the ban on federal funding of embryonic stem cell research. Yet, as upsetting as the lifting of the ban was, the president’s disingenuous claim that he wanted to separate science and politics was just as frustrating.

Despite the hundreds of millions of dollars already spent on embryonic stem cell research, it has proven to be a dead end. In fact, according to the Rev. Tadeusz Pacholczyk, “Up to now, no human being has ever been cured of a disease using embryonic stem cells.” http://www.ncbcenter.org/10Myths.pdf (Pacholczyk holds a Ph.D. in Neuroscience from Yale University and he did post-doctoral research at Massachusetts General Hospital/Harvard Medical School. He is now the Director of Education for the National Catholic Bioethics Center in Philadelphia). In comparison, adult stem cell research has proven very successful, so much so that Pacholczyk asserts that it “ha[s] already cured thousands.” Instead of wasting money financing a branch of medicine that may NEVER produce a single cure, why not spend more money funding the research that has a proven track record of success?

Robert George (professor of Jurisprudence at Princeton) and Eric Cohen (editor-at-large, The New Atlantis) raise an interesting point in their March 9 Wall Street Journal Op-Ed: “The President Politicizes Stem Cell Research”. The two assert that Obama’s executive order “pays no more than lip service to recent scientific breakthroughs that make possible the production of cells that are biologically equivalent to embryonic stem cells without the need to create or kill human embryos.” (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123664280083277765.html) Good point. If our president truly wants to de-politicize science, would he not instead be pushing for further research of those cells that are “biologically equivalent to embryonic stem cells”?

Finally, despite the many arguments for and against embryonic stem cell research, I have yet to hear more than a few people question why researchers are in such desperate need of federal financing. After all, if this research holds the boundless potential that its supporters claim, why haven’t private investors jumped at the opportunity to get in on the ground floor? Cures for diseases such as Parkinson’s, Alzheimer’s, and diabetes would provide revenue bonanzas for investors. Yet, just a few years ago when venture capital was virtually limitless, financiers by-and-large shied away from embryonic stem cell investment opportunities. Why? Because they knew it would be like dumping their money into an abyss. “Potential” means little when the money is coming out of your own pocket.

It is bad enough that we are desecrating human life and offending God by allowing the destruction of embryos. Now we are compounding our sin by giving the sick false hope that a cure may be imminent now that the federal government is funding a branch of research that has accomplished little to date.


Donald Tremblay

Our “Culture of Death” President

President Obama is adding his stamp of approval to our “Culture of Death”. Our new chief executive has already overturned President Bush’s eight-year ban on using U.S. taxpayer dollars to support overseas family planning services (read abortion). Now there is word that he is expected to loosen the federal funding restrictions against embryonic stem cell research, restrictions that have been in place since August 2001. Few Americans realize that his actions are placing this nation on a slippery slope which will lead to scientific perversions, perversions that will make Huxley’s Brave New World look like Mister Roger’s Neighborhood.

Along with the other arguments against embryonic stem cell research–such as its failure to produce any positive results–is the long term damage it will inflict on efforts to ban, or even limit, abortions. Why? The more funding this research receives, the more test subjects will be needed. Although limited numbers of test subjects are not a problem at present, they will be at some point. Embryos will need to come from somewhere. What better way of guaranteeing a steady supply of test subjects than by allowing abortion mills to continue their grisly procedures? Do not be surprised if the government eventually solicits volunteers to undergo impregnation for the sole purpose of providing embryos for research. It will be eerily reminiscent of Hitler’s directive that Nazi women deliver as many children as possible, a directive that even rewarded medals to women who bred at least five children (Medicine in the Twentieth Century, Roger Cooter and John V. Pickstone, Harwood Academic Publishers p 562). Just as women in Nazi Germany were rewarded for selflessly giving birth for the Fatherland, so will American women be praised for selflessly conceiving for science.

Supporters of cloning will also benefit from the lifting of federal funding restrictions against embryonic stem cell research. After all if an embryo is not considered a human being and worthy of rights, why would anyone argue differently for clones? Americans will argue that cloning is an extension of the Roe vs. Wade “Right to Privacy” ruling. People will kick and scream that they have “the right to do what they want with their bodies”, including cloning them for the purpose of harvesting organs and stem cells. Picture Robin Cook’s Coma or the film “The Matrix”. That is where we are headed.

Pretty frightening, isn’t it? And you don’t need to be Nostradamus to envision it happening.

Thank you, Mr. President.


Donald Tremblay

Obama’s Hardly “Catholic Advisory Council”

This presidential campaign’s award for “Oxymoronic Term” goes to Barack Obama. Obama’s “Catholic Advisory Council” is Catholic in name only, which is fitting since Catholic ideals are as essential to Obama’s political platform as the appendix is to the proper functioning of the human body. Sure Obama may agree with the Church on issues such as the Iraq War or Immigration, but when it comes to the issues regarding life and its beginnings (abortion and embryonic stem cell research) his views could not be more anti-Catholic. For ex., in a Catholic News Agency column analyzing the members of Obama’s pseudo Catholic council, Deal W. Hudson states, “five senators and 13 House members have earned 100 percent pro-abortion ratings from NARAL” (http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/column.php?n=216)

If you want to know where Obama really stands concerning Catholic teachings, just review his voting record.

· From 2005-2007 the NARAL Pro Choice America has given Obama a 100% for his Congressional Record on Choice. Here is a quote from a speech given by Obama celebrating the 35-year anniversary of Roe vs. Wade. It is posted on the NARAL website at http://www.prochoiceamerica.org/elections/statements/obama.html: “Throughout my career, I've been a consistent and strong supporter of reproductive justice, and have consistently had a 100% pro-choice rating with Planned Parenthood and NARAL Pro-Choice America”.

· As reported by the website www.HumanEvents.com, Obama voted against bill SB 1661 (2002), listed as a part of the Born Alive Infant Protection Package that “would create a cause of action of a child is born alive after an abortion and the child is then neglected through failure to provide medical care after birth”.

· A press release posted on Obama’s senatorial website (http://obama.senate.gov/press/070411-obama_renews_su/) expresses his support for embryonic stem cell research. The headline of the Wednesday, April 11, 2007 release reads, Obama Renews Support for Embryonic Stem Cell Research. Obama is then quoted saying, “I stand in full support of the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act as I did when this bill was introduced and sent to the President’s desk in the 109th Congress. I am proud to be an original cosponsor of this bill.” He also makes it clear that he understands little as to why opponents disagree, “I am frustrated by the opposition this bill has generated and saddened that we are preventing the advancement of important science that could potentially impact millions of suffering Americans.”

Forget Obama’s eloquence, his engaging smile, and his appeals to moderation. This is a candidate whose views are as antagonistic to Church teachings as any presidential nominee in American history.

Donald Tremblay