Another look at Missouri’s proposed Amendment 2: It’s a fraud

Posted by: ST on October 28, 2006 at 6:04 pm

I blogged last night about Missouri’s proposed Amendment 2, and wanted to do so again today because what I’ve read about it has really been weighing on me. I’ve had a chance to research it some more since my last post, and after doing so, I have no doubt in my mind that those who have asserted that A2 is a pro-cloning bill are 100% correct.

Pro-embryonic stem cell research advocates like Senator Jim Talent’s opponent demagogue Claire McCaskill routinely assert that this bill would “allow” stem cell research in Missouri. But what they deliberately forget to tell voters is that 1) the issue isn’t stem cell research in general but embryonic stem cell research that we’re talking about and 2) stem cell research (including embryonic) is already allowed in Missouri (emphasis added):

The Missouri Stem Cell Research and Cures Initiative, proposed by a coalition of patient and medical organizations, would amend the state constitution to ensure that any stem cell research and treatments allowed under federal law will continue to be allowed in Missouri.

But Amendment 2 is a fraud being committed on Missourians. It claims to ban “cloning” but it provides it’s own definition for cloning in which to “ban” (emphasis added):

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

[...]

(2) “Clone or attempt to clone a human being” means to implant in a uterus or attempt to implant in a uterus anything other than the product of fertilization of an egg of a human female by a sperm of a human male for the purpose of initiating a pregnancy that could result in the creation of a human fetus, or the birth of a human being.

You wouldn’t know the (2) above if you looked at the “fair ballot language” for the bill on the Missouri Sec. of State’s website:

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.

Those in favor of this bill will point out #1 above to try and prove to those who oppose it on cloning grounds that it won’t allow cloning. What they don’t tell you is that their definition of cloning (which is actually at the bottom of the amendment in a list of definitions for what terms in the meat of the bill mean) defines cloning as the creation of another human being, not the creation of an embryo for purposes of destroying it. To repeat: There is nothing in the bill that bans the cloning of an embryo for the purposes of destroying it. In other words, this is a pro cloning bill. NRO’s conclusion, which I posted last night, was right on:

The initiative doesn’t ban cloning. It bans only the implantation of a cloned embryo into a woman’s womb to initiate a pregnancy. In other words, it outlaws the development of a cloned embryo into a cloned baby: You can create a cloned human embryo as long as you kill it during research.

If I remember correctly, Missourians oppose cloning by a ratio of like 9-1. They wouldn’t support this bill if they knew what the fine print really said.

This woman is not telling the truth.THIS is why Senator Jim Talent opposes Amendment 2 and why demagogues like Claire McCaskill try to claim he “doesn’t support cures” and also why McCaskill was all too happy to let Parkinson’s disease sufferer Michael J. Fox essentially assert the same thing. It’s sickening how the wool is being pulled over the eyes of people in Missouri over this complicated issue that deserves honest debate, not cheap political demagoguery for votes. Proponents of of this amendment are trying to write into the Missouri constitution something that states that the Missouri legislature would never be allowed to ban or criminalize any types of stem cell research, including embryonic stem cell research that involves the cloning of and destroying of embryos.

This is the can of worms that McCaskill and other embryonic stem cell research proponents have opened with their misleading advocacy of it and painting of others who are against it as being “against cures for Parkinsons” etc, and once that can is opened it can’t be closed. What pro-stem cell advocates in MO are counting on is the ignorance of the voter in not knowing the specifics of what the amendment states. They think because they can tell people that the first part of the amendment says “No person may clone or attempt to clone a human being” that that means no cloning will be permitted. That is a lie. Cloning WOULD be permitted under this law, you would just clone the embryo in order to destroy it, rather than implant it into a woman’s uterus to create a human being.

The biotechnology legal team that helped the pro-stem cell advocacy crowd in MO write this amendment really are disgusting, underhanded individuals, and I think what they are trying to do in MO is borderline criminal. We are talking about creating embryos specifically to destroy them. It’s freaking sick, it’s morally and ethically wrong and if this amendment passes in MO, I will put the blame squarely at the feet of the dishonest liars who knowingly pushed forth an amendment that they deceived the people of Missouri about. If I lived in MO, I’d be on the frontlines of this battle, and so should ANYONE who does not support cloning, no matter whether they are on the left or the right side of the aisle.

The left have gone too far with this. If they have to count on the ignorance of the voter in order to get something passed then you know there’s something wrong with what they’re advocating. It’s why they want to stifle the debate on this issue (along with many others). They know if all the facts – rather than impassioned emotional rhetoric -were out there about what A2 was really about, they wouldnt’ have a chance in hell of getting it passed. So they have to lie not only about the bill, but opposition to it. It’s a classic lefty tactic: paint yourself as the savior and defender of the sick, while painting your opposition as someone who doesn’t care if the sick people die.

If the left didn’t have “victims” to use with which to advance their underhanded agendas, their party would cease to exist in its current form.

If you’re a Missouri voter, vote NO on Amendment 2. Because if you oppose cloning, you oppose Amendment 2. Send a message to Claire McCaskill, and other embryonic stem cell research demagogues: you won’t take being lied to lying down.

And while you’re at it, vote to re-elect Senator Jim Talent, who is currently leading McCaskill in the polls by only two points. He’s standing on principle on this issue. Claire McCaskill is only doing what it takes to get elected, including being deliberately deceptive and dishonest about issues important to Missourians.

Update: In related news, Michael Steele has responded to the Maryland MJ Fox stem cell research ad Ben Cardin is running with an ad of his own that makes Cardin look about two feet tall. Watch it here and read more commentary about the ad here.

Prior:

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Trackbacks

  • Stop The ACLU trackbacked with Saturday Night Links
  • Leaning Straight Up trackbacked with Another ad in response to Michael J Fox
  • 21 Responses to “Another look at Missouri’s proposed Amendment 2: It’s a fraud”

    Comments

    1. Severian says:

      What’s particularly interesting about this is it’s the Democrats and leftist (but I’m being redundant) standard meme/talking point that it’s the evil Republicans who are in the pockets of the evil pharmaceutical industries. We can’t be trusted because Big Pharma has us in their pockets. But this is clearly a case of the Democrats/liberals deliberately lying to get the public to sign off on a bill that’s completely designed to the specifications of the biotech firms. Talk about hypocritcal. This is a free gimme to biotech-pharma being sold as something it isn’t. Once again, what the Dems accuse us of is what they themselves are doing.

    2. Lorica says:

      I am so sick of these lies. Personally I think everyone of these people should be prosecutable. Especially McCaskill and the BioTech Lawyers. This goes well beyond campaign rehetoric. I pray that the voters in MO, are informed enough to send McCaskill packing with such disgrace that she will never try this again. – Lorica

    3. Thanks again for taking the time to look into this and post on it. I’ve done an updated post on it also and linked to your posts. Thank-you!!

    4. No problem. Just added you to my blogroll. Keep up the good work on this issue. It’s one I’ll be keeping a close eye on election night.

    5. - There’s yet another angle to the cleverly crafted lie, ment to pull the wool over voters eyes. think for a minute the potential results of being able, legally, to clone babies, with the implicit REQUIREMENT they will always be destroyed. Then think of this being used as an unreproachable argument in another arena:

      “Why would you possibly be against early term abortion?…. we kill embryo’s every day now, and it’s perfectly legal – you voted for it!”…

      - Bang **==

    6. Baklava says:

      Sorry. I didn’t see you ad an update with the video…

    7. Drewsmom says:

      For those that support aboution and even partial birth abortion, and theres alot of em out there, this bill is no big deal, just another life taken out.
      But God forbid, the truth come out about why they want this passed so bad and the couple who stand to make millions more if it does pass.
      God must surely be shaking his head and wondering why so many just don’t care about life, how sad is this.

    8. hilchar says:

      How many times must these poor babies die. Each embryo cloned would be the same little person, thus he/she must die a multitude of times. How sad.

      How sick has america become?

    9. Marshall Art says:

      I couldn’t agree more, hilchar. The libs and Hollywood elite whine about being ashamed of our country because of Bush and other conservatives, but what brings shame to this country most is the clear disregard for human life by so many on the left, and even some on the right. I would support any candidate that called for a freeze on any embryonic stem cell research, abortion or invitro fertilization until it can be proven empirically that one is a person at a later moment than fertilization. There is NO science that supports any such contention. I have a standing request for such proof. Until then, any of the above procedures should be punishable by law.

    10. Nathan says:

      A definition you apparently didn’t bother to look up:

      embryo: In humans, the prefetal product of conception from implantation through the eighth week of development

      Note that the ball of cells you create in vitro following somatic cell nuclear transfer is NOT an embryo OR a human being. It is a bundle of undifferentiated cells that has ZERO percent chance of ever becoming anything remotely human unless implanted in a surrogate. Anyone who thinks this is the equivalent of killing a baby wouldn’t pass high school biology.

      Every day, women all over the world experience spontaneous abortions in the first month of pregnancy without ever realizing they were pregnant, having shown no signs of pregnancy or a disruption in their cycle. Those fertilized eggs actually had a chance of becoming human beings…and yet we do not cry for them. Where is the outrage? Where are the people clamoring to find ways of reducing the rates of early-stage miscarriage? How can people care so much about undifferentiated cells that could never have become a human being, but not about 20 and 30-day old fertilized eggs that are flushed down the toilet unknowingly by women every day?

      If you’re going to throw loaded words around, at least bother to look them up before you go saying things like: “You can create a cloned human embryo as long as you kill it during research.” No one’s asking to create/kill embryos for this research. They’re creating blastocysts. This isn’t a matter of semantics (try looking up the definitions). It’s a matter of scientific ignorance on the part of Americans across the country who are increasingly taught that scientists are the enemy, and who have no interest in getting informed.

      Science isn’t the enemy. Ignorance is. Educate yourself.

    11. “If you’re going to throw loaded words around, at least bother to look them up before you go saying things like: “You can create a cloned human embryo as long as you kill it during research.” No one’s asking to create/kill embryos for this research. They’re creating blastocysts. This isn’t a matter of semantics (try looking up the definitions). It’s a matter of scientific ignorance on the part of Americans across the country who are increasingly taught that scientists are the enemy, and who have no interest in getting informed.

      Science isn’t the enemy. Ignorance is. Educate yourself. ”

      Try learning to READ before you attempt to educate others on the definitions of words, pal. If you think the “science is your friend” crowd isn’t asking to clone embryos, you better think again. If they weren’t asking, the definition of cloning in A2 would be much more specific.

      Keep your head in the sand. Ignorance is bliss, eh? It makes no difference to me what you think. People who want to learn are the people I’m interested in talking to.

    12. Severian says:

      Anyone who thinks this is the equivalent of killing a baby wouldn’t pass high school biology.

      Well, back when I took highschool biology, it was taught as a science not an ideological indoctrination tool.

      You’re playing the “depends on what the meaning of “is” is” game. As though naming a human embryo something other than a human actually changes anything. You are as guilty of New Speak as any and all of the other liberals and Democrats out there, attempt to use language to obscure rather than enlighten, which is what people tend to do when what they are describing is unpalatable to the majority of people. We didn’t “murder” anyone, we just performed some retroactive abortions! Makes as much sense as your argument that this “blob” isn’t a potential person.

    13. CavalierX says:

      >the ball of cells you create in vitro following
      >somatic cell nuclear transfer is NOT an embryo OR a
      >human being

      I call for a DNA check. Fish? Muskrat? Nope. Sorry, but I’m against using unborn humans as lab rats.

      I maintain my question to all those in favor of embryonic — excuse me, perhaps we should call it blastocystic stem cell research. Why not use cloned or even aborted embryos to alleviate world hunger, if you think they aren’t human? I eagerly await your answer.

    14. Baklava says:

      mmmm yummy…. Wrapped in seaweed…. with wasabi and soy sauce…:o

    15. Fox says:

      The second point of the Amendment states:

      (2) No human blastocyst may be produced by fertilization solely for the purpose of stem cell research.

      Doesn’t this necessarily invalidate the possibility of “cloning embryos for the purpose of destroying them”? Seems to me like it does.

    16. Severian says:

      Then, the approach will be to create some for some other reason and then be left with many “spares.” Whether for other research, or for treating infertility through in vitro fertilizaton, and oops, extra embryos.

    17. Don Quixote says:

      Since the election is tomorrow, I did my own homework tonight. I was appalled by how deceitful the ballot wording actual is in comparison to the actual amendment.

      I’ve posted some examples if people want even more details than Sister Toldjah graciously provided.