AccessMyLibrary provides FREE access to over 30 million articles from top publications available through your library.
Create a link to this page
Copy and paste this link tag into your Web page or blog:
Moving at jet speed, the Massachusetts state legislature has approved legislation endorsing cloning and embryo research. Although Governor Mitt Romney has indicated that he will veto any bill that includes cloning, he lacks enough votes to prevent an override. At the time of this writing, a conference committee is ironing out technical differences between separate bills passed in the Senate and House before sending a final bill to the Governor's desk.
Last year, Harvard University scientists announced its decision to begin cloning experiments involving the creation and destruction of human embryos to harvest embryonic stem cells.
The major media in the state, including the Boston Globe (no surprise) and the formerly more responsible Boston Herald, editorialized in favor of Harvard's move. State Senate and House leaders promised to fast-track legislation removing key provisions of a state law barring embryo research.
Scientists and representatives of groups of patients with various diseases started making the talk-show rounds and contacting their legislators, making emotional appeals to let science help the suffering.
Defenders of human life did not sit back. The Catholic Bishops in the state sponsored a major media blitz, featuring commercials and print ads.
The campaign stressed the difference between embryonic and adult stem cells (which raise no moral objections). The ads also made clear that just because a cloned human embryo is not implanted in the womb does not change the fact that this new human being was created by cloning in the first place.
At a hearing of the Joint Committee on Economic Development and Emerging Technologies in February, pro-lifers brought in an impressive array of scientists and other witnesses to testify. The line-up included individuals with Parkinson's disease and other ailments who gave moving presentations. They told the committee that despite their own difficult circumstances they would reject therapies developed at the expense of another human's life.