Scientists in Oregon Kill Human Embryos For “Research”

Ethics, Life, Sanctity of Life, , , , ,

This week the MIT Technology Review reported that scientists in Oregon have become the first in the U.S. to edit the DNA of human embryos.

The MIT Technology Review writes,

The effort, led by Shoukhrat Mitalipov of Oregon Health and Science University, involved changing the DNA of a large number of one-cell embryos with the gene-editing technique CRISPR, according to people familiar with the scientific results.

Until now, American scientists have watched with a combination of awe, envy, and some alarm as scientists elsewhere were first to explore the controversial practice. To date, three previous reports of editing human embryos were all published by scientists in China.

To call this research “controversial” is an understatement. It is unconscionable for two reasons.

First, in order to carry out their research, scientists created human embryos. These human embryos were living human beings–albeit very small, helpless human beings. Researchers in Oregon created these human beings; experimented on them; and then apparently killed them.

Ethically speaking, this is no different from embryonic stem cell research in which human embryos are created and then killed in order to harvest their stem cells for scientific use.

The second reason this research is unconscionable is that it could pave the way for “designer babies” in which embryos are edited to produce certain characteristics. Scientists who support this research say it could one day allow doctors to correct genetic abnormalities in unborn children, but it could also allow parents and doctors to engineer children with certain traits or enhancements.

It’s worth noting this is not the first time these researchers in Oregon have engaged in this type of activity. In 2013 they published research claiming to have cloned and killed human embryos in order to obtain their stem cells.

As we have said many times, human beings are not research material. All scientific research must respect the sanctity of human life. And we should not do anything that might encourage or allow doctors to produce customized “designer children.”

You can read more about the research in question here.

READ MORE

Family Council Denounces Misinformation on Abortion Laws

Abortion, , ,

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Thursday, July 13, 2017

Little Rock, AR—Ahead of a Thursday hearing regarding legal challenges against several pro-life laws, Family Council President Jerry Cox issued a statement, saying, “A lot of misinformation has spread in recent days about these good, pro-life laws. We want to set the record straight.

“These laws help prohibit companies from buying or selling organs harvested from aborted babies. They ensure aborted babies are respectfully buried or cremated. They help protect minors who may be victims of rape, incest, or human trafficking. They require doctors to request at least some of a woman’s medical records before performing an abortion. They require abortion clinics to be properly licensed and inspected. And they prohibit surgical abortion procedures in which an unborn baby is dismembered. These are good laws that will protect the lives, health, and safety of  Arkansans.”

Cox said opponents of the laws have spread confusion through incorrect information. “Instead of talking about the merits of the laws, opponents have resorted to scare tactics and debunked rumors. A few people have tried to argue these laws somehow require a sexual assault victim to get her attacker’s permission before having an abortion or let a man sue to prevent a woman from having an abortion. These are ridiculous arguments that were discredited months ago when the legislature first discussed these laws. None of these laws lets the father of the unborn child stop a woman from having an abortion, and Arkansas does not recognize the parental rights of rapists.”

Cox praised state legislators for passing these pro-life laws last spring. “Most of these laws passed with bipartisan support. A few passed nearly unanimously in the Arkansas House or Arkansas Senate. Our lawmakers know these are good laws. I am optimistic our courts ultimately will agree.”

###

Photo Credit: By Brian Turner (Flickr: My Trusty Gavel) [CC BY 2.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons.

READ MORE

Cutting Though the Confusion on Arkansas’ Abortion Laws

Abortion, , ,

Yesterday the Huffington Post published a column regarding pro-life laws passed by the Arkansas Legislature earlier this year.

The article contains some confusion about the laws and what they do. We want to set the record straight.

First, the article’s title claims Arkansas’ new pro-life laws will require women to get permission from men before they can have an abortion. This is not true.

This title seems to be based on a debunked argument a few people tried to use against Rep. Andy Mayberry’s (R-Hensley) bill to ban dismemberment abortions earlier this year.

At the time, some abortion advocates tried to argue the bill would let the father of the unborn child sue to stop the mother from getting an abortion. This argument began popping up on websites and in emails back in February, but it was quickly debunked by people who took the time to read and understand the bill. The Huffington Post is simply recycling incorrect information.

The article also refers to H.B. 1566 by Rep. Kim Hammer (R-Benton) as a “personhood law” and says the law will force a woman to tell the father of the unborn baby she plans to have an abortion.

H.B. 1566 was not a “personhood law.” Nothing in the law says that an unborn baby is a person. And H.B. 1566 does not require women to tell anyone they plan to have an abortion, either.

Instead, H.B. 1566 does two things.

First, it prohibits research on aborted fetal remains; this will help prevent companies from buying or selling organs harvested from aborted babies.

Second, H.B. 1566 says aborted babies will be disposed of according to the Arkansas Final Disposition Rights Act of 2009. This will ensure aborted babies are respectfully buried or cremated. In the past, Arkansas law has allowed the bodies of aborted babies to be incinerated as medical waste.

H.B. 1566 does not stop a woman from having an abortion; instead it helps stop companies from buying or selling aborted baby parts, and it ensures aborted babies are treated respectfully.

The article also implies H.B. 1566 would force a woman who has been raped to consult with her attacker before she can have an abortion or bury or cremate the aborted baby. Again, this simply is not true.

H.B. 1566 doesn’t require a woman to get consent from anyone before having an abortion, and Arkansas law does not recognize the parental rights of rapists. That is something the Arkansas Legislature has worked hard to address in the past.

Unfortunately, we are seeing a lot of misinformation being shared online thanks to social media and shoddy journalism.

My advice is simple: If you want to understand Arkansas’ five pro-life laws the ACLU is challenging in court, read them for yourself. You can find links to all five of them below.

Act 603 regarding the remains of aborted babies: http://www.arkleg.state.ar.us/assembly/2017/2017R/Acts/Act603.pdf

Act 45 regarding dismemberment abortion: http://www.arkleg.state.ar.us/assembly/2017/2017R/Acts/Act45.pdf

Act 733 regarding sex-selection abortion: http://www.arkleg.state.ar.us/assembly/2017/2017R/Acts/Act733.pdf

Act 1018 regarding reporting of abortions on underage girls: http://www.arkleg.state.ar.us/assembly/2017/2017R/Acts/Act1018.pdf

Act 383 regarding the licensing and inspection of abortion clinics: http://www.arkleg.state.ar.us/assembly/2017/2017R/Acts/Act383.pdf

READ MORE