Researchers Continue to Kill Human Embryos in the Name of Science

We have written before about how scientists have tried to use the controversial gene-editing technology CRISPR to alter the human genome.

In some cases, researchers have attempted to create human-animal hybrids using this type of technology.

This week our friends at the Colson Center for Christian Worldview have highlighted yet another example of scientists using CRISPR to meddle with — and then kill — human embryos in the name of science.

John Stonestreet writes,

[A] team of researchers at the Francis Crick Institute in London used CRISPR to edit 18 donated human embryos. The purpose, they claimed, was to study “the role of a particular gene in the earliest stages of human development.” Unfortunately, around half of the embryos “contained major unintended edits.”

“Major unintended edits” is a euphemism for “mutation” and “genetic damage” which, as Medium told its readers, “could lead to birth defects or medical problems like cancer later in life.” As one genetics researcher put it, “…you’re affecting so much of the DNA around the gene you’re trying to edit that you could be inadvertently affecting other genes and causing problems.” Even worse, the Crick Institute team didn’t inadvertently mess with a gene near the one they were targeting. In other words, they “hit their targets.” The results were, however, unexpected.

Fyodor Urnov, a professor of molecular and cell biology at Berkeley, was more blunt: “There’s no sugarcoating this . . . This is a restraining order for all genome editors to stay the living daylights away from embryo editing.”

Once a “gene-editing expert” gets frightened, you’d think we might want to cool our jets in this whole “playing god” thing. I doubt it. . . . By the way, all the embryos affected by the Francis Crick Institute team were destroyed.

This kind of “create-and-kill” research is simply unconscionable.

It treats unborn children like lab material.

The unborn children created and killed as part of these gene-editing experiments had zero say in what happened to them. They were simply at the mercy of researchers in a lab.

As we have said many times, human beings are not research material. Unfortunately, gene-editing technologies like CRISPR treat them that way.

We must insist that scientific research respect the sanctity of human life at every stage of development.

Sweden: Report Shows Elderly COVID Patients Denied Care

Troubling information out of Sweden shows elderly COVID-19 patients were denied care thanks to confusing guidelines from government health officials.

A recent article at BioEdge highlights the fact that half of Sweden’s COVID deaths were in nursing homes:

The health authorities have received many complaints about how elderly relatives were treated. A consistent theme is that nursing home residents with suspected Covid-19 were immediately placed on palliative care and given morphine and denied supplementary oxygen and intravenous fluids and nutrition. For many this was effectively a death sentence.

“People suffocated, it was horrible to watch. One patient asked me what I was giving him when I gave him the morphine injection, and I lied to him,” said Latifa Löfvenberg, a nurse. “Many died before their time. It was very, very difficult.”

The problem seems to be that health officials in Sweden gave doctors guidelines effectively encouraging them to ration care to prevent the healthcare system from being overwhelmed.

That led to elderly patients being placed on palliative care instead of being given treatment for COVID-19.

The article notes that giving morphine to a patient who has a respiratory illness — like COVID-19 — and then denying the patient additional oxygen effectively will kill the patient.

This story underscores why it is essential that our leaders and healthcare professionals value the sanctity of human life from conception until natural death.

Time and again we have heard stories about patients in Europe being denied care or actively euthanized thanks to bad government policies.

Similar stories have come out of states where assisted-suicide is legal here in America.

Being pro-life means believing human life is sacred from conception until natural death.

Just like abortion, euthanasia and assisted-suicide are murder, and they violate the sanctity of human life.

Challenging the “New Normal” on Commercial Surrogacy

Last week we published a blog post about New York’s recent decision to legalize commercial surrogacy.

On Friday, John Stonestreet at the Colson Center for Christian Worldview released a column about CNN host Anderson Cooper’s decision to hire a commercial surrogate.

Stonestreet writes,

This story demonstrates that commercial surrogacy, including cases in which the child is intentionally deprived of its mother, is now fully normal. . . .

Behind Anderson Cooper’s money and these headlines is this baby’s mom. No matter what we tell ourselves about how willing she was or how better off she is now, she is harmed and so is her son – who somehow knew from the moment he was born to look for her. Unfortunately, he won’t find her. Shame on us.

Stonestreet points out several of the ethical problems with commercial surrogacy, such as:

  • Commercial surrogacy assumes “children” are a right that God never promised
  • It denies children the opportunity to be raised by their biological mom and a dad
  • It treats children as products
  • It poses a significant risk of financial exploitation for women

As we keep saying, being pro-life means believing that human life is sacred from conception until natural death.

It means treating human life with respect at every stage of development.

It also means recognizing that human beings are not products that can be bought or sold. That’s why Family Council opposes commercial surrogacy — and will continue to oppose it.

Read John Stonestreet’s entire commentary here.