New Stanek WND column: "What lies beneath: MO's titanic stem cell initiative"

wnd_logo.gif

Consider the iceberg: Only the tip is visible.

Such is the short Missouri Stem Cell Research and Cures Initiative to be voted on next month. Beneath it looms a titanic constitutional amendment.

Amendment Two, as it is called, is a proportional Titanic. At five pages and 2,000 words, it is half the length of the entire United States Constitution. Its opening paragraph - conveniently omitted from promoter Missouri Coalition for Lifesaving Cures' website - lists 45 sections of the Constitution of Missouri it would incredibly delete or change.

Amendment Two is also a linguistic Titanic. Crafted by researchers and groups with financial stakes in its passage, it is packed with convoluted legal and scientific jargon chopped up and buried in various places so it really says the opposite of what they say it says.

Amendment Two's biggest lie: "No person may clone or attempt to clone a human being."

To say that, crafters simply changed the definition of cloning to say a clone isn't a clone unless implanted in a mother's uterus.

This is like saying you are not you unless you are in your house. If you leave your house, you are no longer you. You are a thing. And if you are caught outside your house, you can be dissected and sold for parts.

Crafters said while they banned cloning, they endorsed "somatic cell nuclear transfer." This is like banning the killing of humans but endorsing the killing of Homo sapiens....

Some other whoppers in Amendment Two....

Continue reading my column today, "The deception of Missouri's titanic stem cell initiative," on WND.com.


Comments:

You say the biggest lie is "No person may clone or attempt to clone a human being."

How many humans have ever been born from cloning?

The answer is zero. Fact.

It is not possible to clone a human.

Your attitude that the Scientists who have given their lives to research cures and alleviate human suffering are only in it for profit and money is dishearting and a false representation. These Scientists genuinely want to help cure disease.

You imply that you know more about the definition of a blastocyst than the scientists and numerous judges who approved the ballot language. You must be really intelligent to know so much more than them.

You ask "Why the push for Amendment Two?"

The truth is that Science is merely defending itself from legistlative attacks from a few fundmantalist state senators who have tried to pass bills numerous times that propose to criminalize the right to recieve treatments, therapies, and research from stem cells.

Dont tread on my rights to cures. If you don't agree with it morally then dont take any treatment. You don't have the right to restrict my access to lifesaving cures because you have a different opinion than I do. God put us here so we can make individual choices.

Posted by: moderate at October 11, 2006 10:06 AM


I like the sound of this Amendment Two. I'd vote for it. Sounds like good public policy.

Posted by: Abe at October 11, 2006 12:21 PM


Moderate,

It is not YET possible to clone a human. South Korea's Hwang Woo-suk did so last year. Oh, never mind. It turns out he was a fraud who also coerced underlings to donate eggs, which comes with the territory.

You write as if cloning humans is far-fetched, when many animals have been cloned. It's only a matter of time. It's the goal. Read this:

www.missouricures.com/rel_021705.php

These scientists you're attempting to rally pity for are malfeasants attempting the greatest deception of the 21st century.

The definition of blastocyst they're pitching is but one example. A blastocyst is a young embryo. Why didn't they say that?

Don't tread on your right to cures? What, over your dead body? Oh, wait, you want the right over someone else's dead body. Sorry.

Posted by: Jill Stanek at October 11, 2006 4:06 PM


"It is not possible to clone a human."

Oh, it is very possible. It just hasn't been done...yet.

Well done Jill! You nailed it. Coming from a scientist, (as much as Moderate can't stand to hear it) you do know as much about "blastocysts" as we do! Maybe that is because you have some common sense.

Posted by: Rebecca Taylor at October 11, 2006 9:41 PM


Rebecca, thanks for the "common sense" statement. FYI, I am a registered nurse who has worked in labor and delivery, so I have background on this topic.

Posted by: Jill Stanek at October 12, 2006 3:15 AM


Oh, I know that. I was just pointing out Moderate's little ad hominem jab implying that scientists know better than you and everyone else.

Posted by: Rebecca at October 12, 2006 8:09 AM


Dear taxpayer,

We would like to vote "yes" for our intentionally confusing, obfuscating and prevaricating amendment: It says we may someday be able to find a way for the public to make us millionaires (alleged cures for some diseases). We don't want to be at all accountable for any possible failure to do so, and we don't want to ever have even the remotest possiblility that we will ever have to pay for it because we want you, the taxpayer, to pay for it. If you vote "yes" for it, it will probably be impossible for you or anyone to ever undo this amendment, because it will delete sections of the present constitution that would normally hold us accountable. It is common practice amoung despots to dismantle any system of accountabilty.

Good luck seeing trough our tear-jerking "we'll find a cure for diseases" hype. The bold print giveth and the fine print taketh away.

Posted by: P.R. Love at October 20, 2006 11:25 PM


In the recent issue of "Discovery" magazine, a scientist discovered that by subjecting mouse cells to four specific chemicals they turned back into stem cells! Admittadly, mouse cells are a lot simpler than human cells, but if research was accelerated in this direction you could take a person's own cells, turn them back into stem cells without any fear of rejection. This would bypass all the "let's profit from the killing of tiny babies" moral stench.
I don't thing there's anyone out there that doesn't want the cure to these diseases, but the ends does not justify the alleged means.

Posted by: P.R. Love at October 20, 2006 11:39 PM


All the money I want and NO restrictions, wow sign you up. Leave meoutof this. I have enough bills to pay. What other programs will go down because all the money is going to this ????

Posted by: don at October 25, 2006 8:51 PM


Many people fear what they do not understand. The reactionary response to cloning and stem cell research is made by people who prefer living fearfully and make no attempt to delve into the subject (and many other subjects for that matter). I'm not here to explain it to you, there's plenty of real info on this stuff if you sift through the garbage, but I will clear up a few things for you.
If I met a person cloned from another person tomorrow (or I suppose you envision one locked in a cage), his rights would be protected dandily under our current laws... he is a man. And in the cage scenario you imagine I could call the authorities and free him under very old laws. What are you afraid of, did you know there is more to you -the final product, than genes? Did you know identical twins are clones? Are you afraid cloning will be the latest fashion and you'll never know which one owes you money? We have nothing to fear but fear itself.

Posted by: Matt at October 31, 2006 12:14 AM


Stem cells. No one wants your baby or your fetus. By all means keep it raise it love it. However, fertility clinics have been fertilizing eggs developing them to a point and inserting them into America's wives. They have a lot of leftover embryos, most with the potential to be people, and destroy them. They can also be used for research. Shocked? I'll bet you'd gladly squash a clump of human cells to save your son or daughter's life, I'd question your morality if you didn't. They also retrieve stem cells from umbilical chord after birth. Although I'm sure if you don't want it going to the evil health researchers they'd let you take it home.

Posted by: Micheal at October 31, 2006 12:15 AM