Laz
07-11-2006, 10:53 AM
Stem-cell research foes mobilizing
Ads, talks at homes, public events are featured. Supporters cite ‘scare tactics.’
By KIT WAGAR
The Star’s Jefferson City correspondent
Opponents of early stem-cell research have begun building a grassroots movement against a proposed November ballot initiative by appealing to Catholics, religious conservatives, tax critics and women.
Opponents, who began running television ads last month in St. Louis, are also attempting to tap into societal misgivings about the frontiers of science by questioning whether scientists can be trusted.
In their overtures to anti-tax activists, they insist that the ballot measure would open the spigot of tax money to support research that many religious leaders have labeled repugnant.
“We want to educate people,” said Adrienne Hynek, Respect Life director of the Catholic Diocese of Kansas City-St. Joseph. “If people know the truth about this, they will oppose it.”
The ballot measure, known as the Missouri Stem Cell Research and Cures initiative, would amend the state constitution to permit all stem-cell research allowed under federal law. That would include research using stem cells taken from fertilized eggs left over from in vitro fertilization treatments and stem cells created in the lab by cloning a patient’s own cells.
Supporters say the regenerative capacity of early — also called embryonic — stem cells holds the potential to cure diabetes, Parkinson’s disease, spinal injuries and a host of other chronic conditions.
Opponents, led by the Catholic Church and other abortion opponents, argue that both the fertilized eggs and the cloned cells are humans who are killed when the stem cells are extracted.
Donn Rubin, chairman of the initiative’s sponsor, the Missouri Coalition for Lifesaving Cures, dismissed opponents’ tactics as fake issues intended to confuse voters.
“They are inventing problems and using scare tactics to mislead voters and distract from what the cures initiative does,” Rubin said. “It ensures equal access for Missourians to the same stem-cell therapies and cures available to all other Americans.”
The first rumbling by opponents of early stem-cell research came last month when an anti-abortion group called the Vitae Caring Foundation, based in Jefferson City, began running a television ad in St. Louis. The ad features David Prentice, a senior fellow at the Family Research Council, who says medical research should be limited to the body’s regenerative cells, often called “adult stem cells.”
Creating stem cells in the laboratory, he says, is “just another name for human cloning.”
The Catholic Church sponsored a June 29 fundraiser at a private home in Kansas City to help pay for the ads. In a letter to parishioners throughout Kansas City, Bishop Robert Finn said the ads were “specifically designed to combat the evils associated with embryonic stem-cell research.”
“We cannot be silent, because so many innocent human lives are at stake,” Finn wrote.
Jaci Winship, executive director of Missourians Against Human Cloning, lead opponent of the ballot initiative, said the campaign is a grassroots effort. The group sends speakers to churches, county fairs and local events but probably won’t begin mass advertising until the last two months of the campaign, she said.
The group’s speakers criticize the initiative on several levels. Hynek said the measure is deceptive because it claims to ban human cloning. While the measure would make it a crime to try to implant cloned cells into a woman’s uterus, it actually protects cloning cells in the laboratory, she said.
“People will read it and say, ‘Of course I want to ban human cloning’ and want to vote for it,” Hynek said. “But this initiative still allows cloning embryos as long as you kill a cloned embryo within 14 days of creating it.”
Opponents also have begun emphasizing the effect on women. Cloning cells involves taking genetic material from a patient and inserting it into a human egg cell whose nucleus has been removed. Opponents contend the large number of egg cells needed would lead to widespread exploitation of poor women.
Donors must receive fertility drugs to stimulate production of extra eggs, then undergo surgery to capture the eggs. Winship said the procedure can cause strokes, kidney damage and other medical problems.
Opponents also say the initiative would lead to tax funding of research. Winship pointed to a section of the initiative that would prevent the legislature from reducing funds for institutions that engage in early stem-cell research. That inevitably would lead to taxpayers supporting research that many people consider unethical, she said.
Hynek pointed to the same provision and said it could eliminate any limits on scientific research by removing any input from the public. The initiative sets up an oversight board that must approve all applications to engage in early stem-cell research, but Hynek said that would simply allow scientists to oversee themselves.
Rubin said opponents were wrong on all three issues: The initiative specifically bans the purchase or sale of human eggs, so they would have to come from a volunteer donor. It says nothing about state funding of stem-cell research, only that the legislature cannot cut funding used for other purposes. And the initiative imposes ethical guidelines and limits on activities that are now unregulated, he said.
The secretary of state’s office has until Aug. 8 to certify whether the sponsors turned in enough valid signatures to qualify the initiative for the Nov. 7 ballot.
Ads, talks at homes, public events are featured. Supporters cite ‘scare tactics.’
By KIT WAGAR
The Star’s Jefferson City correspondent
Opponents of early stem-cell research have begun building a grassroots movement against a proposed November ballot initiative by appealing to Catholics, religious conservatives, tax critics and women.
Opponents, who began running television ads last month in St. Louis, are also attempting to tap into societal misgivings about the frontiers of science by questioning whether scientists can be trusted.
In their overtures to anti-tax activists, they insist that the ballot measure would open the spigot of tax money to support research that many religious leaders have labeled repugnant.
“We want to educate people,” said Adrienne Hynek, Respect Life director of the Catholic Diocese of Kansas City-St. Joseph. “If people know the truth about this, they will oppose it.”
The ballot measure, known as the Missouri Stem Cell Research and Cures initiative, would amend the state constitution to permit all stem-cell research allowed under federal law. That would include research using stem cells taken from fertilized eggs left over from in vitro fertilization treatments and stem cells created in the lab by cloning a patient’s own cells.
Supporters say the regenerative capacity of early — also called embryonic — stem cells holds the potential to cure diabetes, Parkinson’s disease, spinal injuries and a host of other chronic conditions.
Opponents, led by the Catholic Church and other abortion opponents, argue that both the fertilized eggs and the cloned cells are humans who are killed when the stem cells are extracted.
Donn Rubin, chairman of the initiative’s sponsor, the Missouri Coalition for Lifesaving Cures, dismissed opponents’ tactics as fake issues intended to confuse voters.
“They are inventing problems and using scare tactics to mislead voters and distract from what the cures initiative does,” Rubin said. “It ensures equal access for Missourians to the same stem-cell therapies and cures available to all other Americans.”
The first rumbling by opponents of early stem-cell research came last month when an anti-abortion group called the Vitae Caring Foundation, based in Jefferson City, began running a television ad in St. Louis. The ad features David Prentice, a senior fellow at the Family Research Council, who says medical research should be limited to the body’s regenerative cells, often called “adult stem cells.”
Creating stem cells in the laboratory, he says, is “just another name for human cloning.”
The Catholic Church sponsored a June 29 fundraiser at a private home in Kansas City to help pay for the ads. In a letter to parishioners throughout Kansas City, Bishop Robert Finn said the ads were “specifically designed to combat the evils associated with embryonic stem-cell research.”
“We cannot be silent, because so many innocent human lives are at stake,” Finn wrote.
Jaci Winship, executive director of Missourians Against Human Cloning, lead opponent of the ballot initiative, said the campaign is a grassroots effort. The group sends speakers to churches, county fairs and local events but probably won’t begin mass advertising until the last two months of the campaign, she said.
The group’s speakers criticize the initiative on several levels. Hynek said the measure is deceptive because it claims to ban human cloning. While the measure would make it a crime to try to implant cloned cells into a woman’s uterus, it actually protects cloning cells in the laboratory, she said.
“People will read it and say, ‘Of course I want to ban human cloning’ and want to vote for it,” Hynek said. “But this initiative still allows cloning embryos as long as you kill a cloned embryo within 14 days of creating it.”
Opponents also have begun emphasizing the effect on women. Cloning cells involves taking genetic material from a patient and inserting it into a human egg cell whose nucleus has been removed. Opponents contend the large number of egg cells needed would lead to widespread exploitation of poor women.
Donors must receive fertility drugs to stimulate production of extra eggs, then undergo surgery to capture the eggs. Winship said the procedure can cause strokes, kidney damage and other medical problems.
Opponents also say the initiative would lead to tax funding of research. Winship pointed to a section of the initiative that would prevent the legislature from reducing funds for institutions that engage in early stem-cell research. That inevitably would lead to taxpayers supporting research that many people consider unethical, she said.
Hynek pointed to the same provision and said it could eliminate any limits on scientific research by removing any input from the public. The initiative sets up an oversight board that must approve all applications to engage in early stem-cell research, but Hynek said that would simply allow scientists to oversee themselves.
Rubin said opponents were wrong on all three issues: The initiative specifically bans the purchase or sale of human eggs, so they would have to come from a volunteer donor. It says nothing about state funding of stem-cell research, only that the legislature cannot cut funding used for other purposes. And the initiative imposes ethical guidelines and limits on activities that are now unregulated, he said.
The secretary of state’s office has until Aug. 8 to certify whether the sponsors turned in enough valid signatures to qualify the initiative for the Nov. 7 ballot.