Life Issues Forum
First Principles and the "Frist Principles"
by Richard
Doerflinger
July 20, 2001
A couple of interesting
things happened at a recent Senate hearing on stem cell research. News media
covered one of those things, and not very well. The full picture has
horrifying implications for our future.
The media reported that Senator
Bill Frist of Tennessee, known as a pro-life Republican and the Senate's only
physician member, testified in favor of funding stem cell research that
requires destroying human embryos. Senator Frist claimed that while such
research is "untried and untested" it also has "huge potential," and so should
be funded even as we show "the highest moral regard" for the embryos we kill
in the process.
So far this is the tale of another Senator who threw
away his pro-life convictions citing a hope of medical benefits. Sadly,
Frist's reference to "moral regard"sounded like the hypocrisy of President
Clinton's National Bioethics Advisory Commission, which concluded that embryos
deserve "respect" as human lives but should be killed for their stem cells.
What is the "respectful" way to suck out a living being's innards and throw
away the shell?
Receiving less media attention was Frist's announcement
that federal funding of this research "should be contingent on the
implementation of strict new safeguards," to prevent abuse of his newfound
loophole in respect for life. Without a trace of irony he presented these as
"Frist Principles on Human Stem Cell Research."
Some of these
"principles" are just silly. For example, one calls for "independent
scientific and ethical review" of the research by the Institute of Medicine
and the Secretary of Health and Human Services. This is like calling for
independent review of the henhouse by the foxes, since IOM and Secretary
Thompson both favor destructive embryo research. Another principle would make
standards for fetal tissue research "consistent" with the rules for embryo
research. This seems to mean that researchers could perform abortions
solely to obtain fetal tissue for government research, just as they may
kill live embryos solely to obtain stem cells.
There were also
"principles" that pro-life Americans can and do support: Ban human cloning;
continue the ban on directly funding destruction of human embryos; ban the
creation of embryos solely for research. These should be pursued in their own
right, not as "trade-offs" for government-sanctioned experimentation on some
humans.
In this context, nonetheless, Frist proposed that it could be
"pro-life" for the government, for the first time in U.S. history, to fund
research on stem cells obtained by killing human embryos. Only embryos "that
would otherwise be discarded" will be used – which is like saying that the
government will fund abortions only for unborn children not wanted by their
parents.
Not covered at all by most media is what happened to the
"Frist Principles" when they were presented to Senators Arlen Specter (R-PA)
and Tom Harkin (D-IA), the Senate's chief promoters of embryo research and the
conveners of this hearing. The principles got massacred.
Frist's effort
to limit the number of embryos killed was denounced by Senator Specter and
several like-minded scientists, who said hundreds of cell lines may be needed
for valid scientific results. One researcher said that ten thousand may be
needed, to obtain a close genetic "match" to most patients needing tissue.
(Keep in mind that each cell line requires destroying many embryos. Recently a
fertility clinic in Virginia created and destroyed over a hundred embryos to
get three cell lines.) Human cloning – creating and killing embryonic "copies"
of each patient to obtain genetically tailored stem cells – was called the
best way to provide tissue that will not be rejected by patients' bodies, and
Harkin and Specter raised no objection.
Senator Specter also asked a
representative of the National Institutes of Health whether the NIH needs to
be able to destroy its own stock of human embryos to do high-quality research.
When the official hesitated at taking this step, Specter angrily threatened to
make massive cuts in total NIH spending unless she expressed support for
federal embryo farms.
In other words, proponents of this grotesque
research have no need for Senator Frist's compromises. They think they have
support for their real agenda: Government embryo farming, creating human life
in the lab solely to destroy it, cloning to make multiple human guinea pigs.
The whole frightening Brave New World is before our eyes -- which should help
us concentrate on what the real issue is.
Senator Frist said his
support for funding embryonic stem cell research is "contingent" on these
principles, and the principles were ridiculed and rejected by his newfound
pro-abortion friends. He now may realize they are no friends. And President
Bush might learn from the fate of the hapless Bill Frist: There's no
negotiating with the ideologues who want a Brave New World. The only
reasonable approach to embryonic stem cell research is not to do it at
all.
_____________________
(Mr. Doerflinger is Associate Director
for Policy Development at the Secretariat for Pro-Life Activities, U.S.
Conference of Catholic Bishops.)
__________________________________
Secretariat for Pro-Life Activities
United States Conference of
Catholic Bishops
3211 4th Street, N.E., Washington, DC 20017-1194 (202)
541-3070