wfn.org | Bush draws praise, criticism for stem cell decision

[PCUSA NEWS <PCUSA.NEWS@ecunet.org>]

Note #6793 from PCUSA NEWS to PRESBYNEWS:

Note #6787 from PCUSA NEWS to PRESBYNEWS:

14-August-2001
01272

Bush draws praise, criticism for stem cell decision

by Adelle M. Banks
Religion News Service

WASHINGTON - Did President Bush make a mistake in permitting limited federal
funding of embryonic stem cell research? Or did he find a fine line in the
controversy over the potential for improving the lives of the sick by using
destroyed human embryos?

	Among the nation's religious leaders, it depends on who you ask.

	Drawing on his discussions with scientific, political and religious leaders
as well as his personal faith, Bush addressed the nation Aug. 9 for the
first time as president to detail his decision.

	He called for funding of some 60 current "lines" of embryonic stem cells,
but did not allow funding for research on embryos that have not yet been
destroyed or might be derived from human cloning.

	Bishop Joseph A. Fiorenza, president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic
Bishops, harshly criticized the president's actions.

	"The trade-off he has announced is morally unacceptable: The federal
government, for the first time in history, will support research that relies
on the destruction of some defenseless human beings for possible benefit to
others," Fiorenza said in a statement.

	Ken Connor, president of the Family Research Council, was among other
conservative Christians speaking out about the decision. He worried about
where Bush's statements will lead the nation.

	"The president has, by agreeing to underwrite such research, embraced the
logic of those who advocate such research," said Connor, one of a dozen
anti-abortion speakers who took turns at a National Press Club microphone
Aug. 10, mostly in complete opposition to Bush's announcement. "The issue
will no longer be whether such research ought to be permitted, but rather
how many cell lines are enough."

	But other Christian leaders took different views, at times praising the
president for how he walked a bioethical technological tightrope.

	"I believe that President Bush provided an elegant solution to the thorny
issue of stem cell research by firmly protecting the rights of the unborn
while allowing potentially life-saving research to go forward by the use of
60 existing embryonic stem cell lines for further research," said Pat
Robertson, president of the Christian Coalition and founder of the Christian
Broadcasting Network.

	James Dobson, president of Focus on the Family, a conservative Christian
organization based in Colorado, voiced relief that Bush was calling only for
funding of research on embryos that had already been destroyed.

	"We grieve for the lives of these embryos," Dobson said. "But we are
delighted that the government will not take part in killing any more."

	Bush's position satisfied - for the most part - officials of his own United
Methodist Church, who had desired a continuing moratorium on research
involving destroyed human embryos.

	"He's narrowed the discussion as much as he could narrow it," said Jaydee
Hanson, assistant general secretary at the denomination's General Board of
Church and Society in Washington, in an interview.

	"If his administration wanted to go ahead and do any funding of any
embryonic research, at least he's not funding the destruction of embryos. At
least he's not permitting research on cloned embryos."

	But Hanson believes there also is a downside: "We're going to come back to
argue this when ... the researchers want to work on more than 60 cell
lines."

	The Rev. Ronald Cole-Turner, editor of Beyond Cloning: Religion and the
Remaking of Humanity, said Bush may have found a compromise, but it was a
political rather than a moral one.

	"There's no grounds for distinguishing morally between an embryo that's
destroyed yesterday and an embryo that's destroyed tomorrow," he said in an
interview. "It's too much politics, not enough clear religious and
philosophical commitment to an understanding of the embryo."

	Cole-Turner, a United Church of Christ minister, teaches theology and
ethics at Pittsburgh Theological Seminary, which is affiliated with the
Presbyterian Church (USA).

	While some religious organizations were glad Bush didn't take further steps
to foster the research, others wished he'd done more.

	Hadassah, the Women's Zionist Organization of America, called the
announcement "an important first step" but urged the president to expand
future funding of stem cell research.

	The Rev. Carlton W. Veazey, president of the Religious Coalition for
Reproductive Choice, disagreed with those who called Bush courageous.

	"His decision to fund highly limited research on existing embryonic stem
cells elevates respect for the embryo over respect for the lives of millions
of people suffering from devastating diseases for which there is no cure,"
Veazey said in a statement.

	Despite their vast disagreement, religious leaders from various points of
view agree that these medical and moral matters will be the subject of
debate for years to come.

	"The entire area of biomedical research and genetic research, both in
humans and in plants and animals, will be the major debate in at least life
ethics in the next few years," predicted Hanson of the United Methodist
Church.

Editor's Note: the PC(USA) position

	Three Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) General Assemblies have addressed issues
related to stem cell and fetal tissue research:

* The 195th General Assembly (1983) said it "discourages development of
human embryos and their use for experimentation except in those cases of
clearly demonstrable benefit where no other substitute could accomplish the
same end. ... The deepest issues of life and its meaning must not be
obscured in the rush to profits and benefits promised by new
biotechnologies."

* The 204th General Assembly (1992) expressed its "opposition to abortions
for the express purpose of selling or providing tissues for research or
transplantation, and is opposed to the sale of fetal human tissue obtained
in an elective abortion. However, we are opposed to, and cannot concur with,
calling on Congress to prohibit the use of federal funding for research
using fetal tissue."

* The 213th General Assembly (2001) said, regarding research on tissue
resulting from abortion: "We believe that the use of tissue derived from
fetuses is morally and ethically acceptable, provided that the procurement
of that tissue is subject to appropriate limitations. ... Regulation of
donations needs to assure that the decision to have an abortion is separated
from the decision to donate fetal tissue. The sale or commercialization of
fetal tissue should be legally prohibited." Regarding research on stem cells
derived from embryos, the Assembly said: "Research with stem cells obtained
from human embryos poses moral difficulties that do not exist in the case of
fetal tissues. The life of the fetus has already been terminated when the
researcher receives tissue from an aborted fetus, while the life of
embryonic tissue resulting from infertility treatment must be terminated.
The morality of ending the life of embryos rests on how one views the moral
status of the embryos. ... Prohibition of the derivation of stem cells from
embryos would elevate the showing of respect to human embryos above that of
helping persons whose pain and suffering might be alleviated. Embryos
resulting from infertility treatment to be used for such research must be
limited to those embryos that do not have a chance of growing into
personhood because the woman has decided to discontinue further treatments
and they are not available for donation to another woman for personal or
medical reasons, or because a donor is not available. Again, the sale or
commercialization of embryonic tissue should be legally prohibited."
------------------------------------------
Send your response to this article to pcusa.news@pcusa.org

------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send an 'unsubscribe' request to

pcusanews-request@halak.pcusa.org
.
------------------------------------------
Send your response to this article to pcusa.news@pcusa.org

------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send an 'unsubscribe' request to

pcusanews-request@halak.pcusa.org