Abortion-related deaths and post-abortion effects
An abortion leaves at least one person dead and one other person wounded, but the
proponents of abortion characterize it as risk-free.
Not Only Do the Babies Die. The truth
is that no one really knows how many people die each year through abortions. We have no real statistics.
Death certificates are being forged to indicate other reasons for the deaths. Some certificates
say, "pregnancy complications" rather than "abortion complications."
Suspended
Pa. abortion doctor had 2 patients die. State authorities cited a recent patient death in
suspending the license of a doctor who performed abortions, but one of dozens of civil lawsuits filed
against him said a woman died from a botched abortion in 2000.
Do Liberal
Editors Read Their Papers? [Scroll down] In [a] recent Philadelphia Inquirer comes
a horrific story of a dirty, dangerous, and deadly abortion center. The abortionist Kermit Baron
Gosnell has been killing unborn children for almost forty years. The long trail of women killed
and disastrous abortion practices he approved makes for depressing — but
necessary — reading. ... Why was this foul Philadelphia facility allowed to operate at all
for so many years with an abortionist in charge whose record was so horrible? Before his
abortion center was shut down, Gosnell had been pushing devices and practices for years that led
to "punctured uterus, hemorrhage, infections, and retained fetal remains."
Doctor
from Hell ... or Godsend? On Feb. 22, state authorities temporarily suspended [Kermit B.]
Gosnell's medical license, labeling his clinic "deplorable" and a danger to the public. Investigators said
that unlicensed employees were medicating and examining patients. Horror stories emerged, in the form of
state documents and old lawsuits. The clinic was linked to the death of one patient, then another.
Sarasota
doctor loses medical license for aborting wrong fetus. After an exceedingly rare and shocking
medical error, state officials have taken away the medical license of a Sarasota ob-gyn who aborted the wrong
fetus in a woman carrying twins, mistaking a seemingly healthy girl for a boy with congenital defects.
Abortion Practitioner Loses Medical License for Killing Wrong
Twin in Failed Abortion. A Florida-based abortion practitioner lost his medical license this weekend
after the state medical board evaluated his license. Matthew Kachinas was supposed to do an abortion on one
of the twin babies who had Down syndrome but wound up killing the other baby in the failed abortion. Kachinas
injected a chemical to kill the baby in the abortion, but the injection ultimately killed the healthy unborn child.
Non-doctor accused of providing abortions in California.
The owner of a clinic has been charged with posing as a doctor to perform abortions, some of them unsuccessful or resulting
in severe complications and hospitalization, prosecutors said Friday [6/20/2008]. Bertha Pinedo Bugarin, 48, was
arrested Thursday [6/21/2008] after a yearlong investigation, San Diego County district attorney spokesman Paul Levikow said.
Abortion-Related Deaths: In 1977 an
Ohio doctor noted that while the official statistics showed no abortion-related deaths in Ohio that year, he
personally knew of two. If one doctor knew of two cases, how many were there really? Abortion was
legalized in California in 1967. According to an article in the Los Angeles Times in 1972, official
records showed just four abortion-related deaths from 1967 to 1972. Yet a reporter for that paper
uncovered three deaths in Los Angeles in just one month in 1972.
Safe and Legal? Holly Patterson died
from safe and legal abortion. Susanne Logan was paralyzed by safe and legal abortion. Sandra M.
died from safe and legal abortion. Carolina G. died from safe and legal abortion.
Christian teenager
died after aborting Muslim boyfriend's child. A teenage Christian died a fortnight after having an abortion
to avoid conflict with her Muslim boyfriend's family, an inquest has heard. Manon Jones, 18, suffered bleeding and
went into shock after part of the embryo remained inside her.
More information about
Islam vs women.
Botched abortion kills both mother
and baby. I have written only a handful of columns that required fighting back the tears.
This is one of them. I got a call last Thursday from a colleague-in-arms asking me for help. He
wanted me to write the story I am about to tell because it has been buried by a conspiratorial level of silence
rooted in political and media bias.
The Health Risks of Abortion: It
is unconscionable for any of us to remain silent in the face of scientific evidence
that undeniably points to the health risks of this procedure for women.
The mourning
after: Instead of focusing on a baby's right to life, supporters of South Dakota's ban zeroed in
on the negative impact of abortion on women, on the consequences of a woman's natural aversion to killing her
own child. Leslie Unruh, who directed the Vote Yes for Life campaign, crisscrossed the state with a
group of post-abortive women who shared their experiences of grief, depression, and substance abuse.
Royal college warns abortions can
lead to mental illness. Women may be at risk of mental health breakdowns if they have abortions, a medical
royal college has warned. The Royal College of Psychiatrists says women should not be allowed to have an abortion
until they are counselled on the possible risk to their mental health. This overturns the consensus that has stood for
decades that the risk to mental health of continuing with an unwanted pregnancy outweighs the risks of living with the
possible regrets of having an abortion.
March of Dimes ignores data on
abortion. At one time, the March of Dimes web site included a statement that women with a
history of three or more miscarriages or abortion may be at higher risk of premature delivery.
According to the Elliot Institute, the risk of premature birth
increases after only one induced abortion. The March of Dimes has removed this information,
yet claims that the 27 percent rise in premature births over the last few decades "is
a mystery."
Abortion and mental
health. A new study from New Zealand, published in the Journal of Child Psychology
and Psychiatry, raises important questions about the effect of abortion on women's mental
health. Researchers found those reporting an abortion prior to age 21 had rates of mental
disorders from age 21 to 25 more than 1½ times higher than the rates for women who did
not become pregnant and those who became pregnant but did not abort.
Congress Must Act on Post-Abortion
Depression. In a brand new longitudinal study of New Zealand youth appearing in this
month's "Journal of Child Psychiatry and Psychology," researchers found that having an abortion as
a young woman increased the risk of a variety of mental health problems, including depression and
suicidal tendencies, by 35 percent compared to those young women who continued with their
pregnancies.
Post-Abortion
Syndrome Manifestations: In a study of post-abortion patients only 8 weeks after their
abortion, researchers found that 44% complained of nervous disorders, 36% had experienced sleep
disturbances, 31% had regrets about their decision, and 11% had been prescribed psychotropic medicine
by their family doctor.
What pro-abortion activists won't say
at their Washington DC rally: There will be no mention of the women who are currently being killed
in their "safe and legal" abortion clinics. [And among other things,] there will be no mention of the
suspected link between abortion and breast cancer.
Study
Reveals Abortion Harms Women's Mental Health … Media Yawn. Unless
you subscribe to the American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, which published the
report last month, or are a fervent researcher of the Internet, you probably haven't
heard of this important study. That's because our mainstream news media recurrently
decline to broadcast studies that cast a skeptical shadow on abortion.
A
Woman's "Choice" That Affects Men: Post-Abortion Trauma. This Father's Day will be a
celebration for dads all over the country, an opportunity for children to thank and honor their fathers.
Yet for many men, the memory of involvement in a past abortion, of "cards they will not receive," will be
painful and palpable. In a debate where the primary focus is a woman's body and a woman's right to
choose whether or not to carry a child to his or her delivery, the "other partner," the father of the baby,
is rarely given consideration, and is often completely disregarded altogether. The question of abortion
is myopically women-centric.
The gruesome details are rarely made public
Most people don't want to hear about abortion. They don't want to debate the subject
or even think about it as anything more than an abstraction. Many people are all
for it, until they find out about the ugly details and see what it really means.
Partial-Birth Abortion on Trial. The
purpose of this pamphlet is to provide excerpts from the abortion doctors' trial testimony. Never
in the years since Roe v. Wade has such extensive evidence about the practice of abortion been placed
in the public record from the mouths of the very doctors who perform them. It is nothing less than a
collection of admissions by the abortion industry, under oath, about the reality of abortion.
North Dakota Measure Seeks to Ban
Decapitation, Skull Crushing during Abortions. A measure to prohibit physicians from
decapitating and crushing the skulls of live unborn children during abortions is seeking clearance to
begin gathering signatures for the November ballot, a North Dakota grassroots pro-life organization has
announced. Daniel Woodard, head of North Dakota's Stop Decapitation Network, filed the paperwork
to the North Dakota Secretary of State and Attorney General on Tuesday [4/13/2010]. The group aims
to collect 12,844 signatures by August 4 in order to place the measure on the 2010 ballot.
Heads Liberals Win, Tails We Lose.
[Scroll down] The same is true for graphic photos of abortions, decried as grotesque by the left.
They're grotesque, all right, because what they depict is abominably grotesque. We have not only the
right to force ourselves to face this grim, unconscionable reality by viewing grotesque pictures, if necessary,
but also the duty. By shielding ourselves from these pictures showing what actually goes on in abortions,
we make it easier on ourselves to do the wrong thing.
Grim
Reaping: Do You Really Know Roe? It's not at all surprising that what public support there
is for Roe v. Wade is typically rooted in a lack of knowledge. Ignorance is bliss, and blissful
ignorance relative to Roe is by design. It's intentionally fueled through obfuscation and disinformation,
fostered by pro-abortion activists and other like-minded leftists. Polls show conclusively that the more
people learn about Roe v. Wade, the less likely they are to support it.
Obamacide: During a partial-birth abortion,
the abortionist pulls a fully developed, fully "viable" child — often kicking and thrashing — feet
first from her mother's womb, leaving only the top of her head in the birth canal. He then stabs her through the skull
with scissors or some other sharp object, piercing her brain until her kicking and moving about suddenly and violently jerk
to a halt. Her brains are then sucked out — collapsing her skull — and her now limp and lifeless
body is tossed aside like so much garbage. Again, medical science has determined that this horrific practice, which is
nothing short of infanticide, is never necessary.
This article goes into the gruesome details
of infants born alive, the left to die...
"Live-Birth"
Abortions. I appeared on Washington Journal this morning with blogger Jane Hamsher. When
the subject of abortion arose I suggested that Barack Obama and not Sarah Palin was the extremist due to his
opposition to the Born Alive Infants Protection Act (or its equivalent in Illinois). Hamsher denied that
babies are ever born alive as a consequence of botched abortions. I invited viewers to write to me for
evidence that it has happened.
Deniers for
Obama. When Congress was considering the Born Alive Infants Protection Act (BAIPA), a
subcommittee of the House Judiciary Committee heard testimony from Jill Stanek and Allison Baker, two nurses
at Christ Hospital in Oak Lawn, Ill. They described several instances in which babies who were moving
and breathing after induced abortions were left to die. The committee report quoted Jill Stanek:
"Mrs. Stanek testified about another aborted baby who was thought to have had spina bifida, but was delivered
with an intact spine. On another occasion, an aborted baby was left to die on the counter of the
Utility Room wrapped in a disposable towel."
The
Growing Aversion to Abortion: The news that the abortion rate has fallen to its lowest
level in 30 years elicits various explanations, from increased use of contraceptives to lack of
access to abortion clinics. But maybe the chief reason is that the great majority of Americans,
even many who see themselves as pro-choice, are deeply uncomfortable with it.
Why Abortion Is Wrong: The moment Harriet Beecher
Stowe picked up her pen, slavery in America was doomed. When it comes to abortion, however, the truth of
what it actually involves is usually hidden from the masses. It's rarely depicted on the screens.
Political commercials showing the procedure are censored so the public is shielded from the horrific carnage
enacted on the human fetus.
A grisly account, but one that is worth reading...
Supreme
Court Says No to 'Intact' Infanticide. In 1996, registered nurse Brenda Pratt Shafer told the
House Subcommittee on the Constitution about a partial birth abortion she'd witnessed. A woman was six
months pregnant with a baby diagnosed with Down Syndrome. She chose death for the child. Shafer
testified that she saw the baby's beating heart on the ultrasound monitor.
Pro-Lifers, Gory Pictures
and the First Amendment. Having been denied recourse to mere words and anything even coming close
to fair-and-balanced media coverage on this most passionate political issue, some pro-life groups are ... causing
quite a stir, pretty much from coast to coast. It seems that folks who aren't even a little hesitant to
rally the crowds round the "choice" to kill a baby in the womb, get downright riled when the bloodstained
pictures of the act itself make it into the public arena, especially around children.
Hospital
admits to burning aborted babies in waste incinerator. One of [England]'s leading hospitals is
throwing aborted babies into the same incinerator used for rubbish to save only £18.50 each time, it has
emerged. Addenbrooke's Hospital, in Cambridge, said it was no longer able to afford the dignified
disposal at a local crematorium of foetuses from unwanted pregnancies.
Fetal Funerals
Sought: Mark and Tanya Cloer wanted to bury their stillborn babies, but hospitals refuse because
the fetuses were considered "hazardous waste."
"It Was Horrible,
Horrible!" A first-hand account of what goes on inside a Chula Vista
abortion clinic. [Note: This article is quite graphic.]
Federal Judge Strikes
Down Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act. The Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act,
which President Bush signed into law in 2003, prohibits the procedure referred to by
abortion rights proponents as "intact dilation and evacuation." In this procedure,
usually performed during the second trimester of pregnancy, the unborn child is removed
intact from the uterus in the breech position. With one hand the doctor holds the
child in place so that the child does not completely come out of the uterus while using
the other hand to puncture the skull with scissors or crush the skull with forceps. The
doctor then drains the skull and the unborn child dies when the brain is either drained
or when sucked from the skull. The unborn child's body is then extracted from the
uterus. Medical testimony reveals that the unborn child jerks and feels pain when
the body is punctured and ripped apart. Futhermore, recent medical testimony also
shows that the unborn child's pain sensitivity is heightened because the younger a
person is, the lower their tolerance for pain.
Painfully
unaware: Fetal-pain expert testifies on the "excruciating" partial-birth
procedure as the government defends its ban against the industry's lawsuit. But
as the trial produces sensational testimony, the courtroom remains virtually journalist-free.
Fetal Pain Information Page: A
collection of key documents on the pain experienced by unborn children.
The Science of Fetal Pain. At 20-30 weeks,
the human being has the highest number of pain receptors per square inch, more than any other time in
development. Fibers which help to moderate pain do not begin to develop until 32-34 weeks, thus
making the argument that babies feel pain more severely between 20-32 weeks.
Abortionists
Admit Dismemberment Horror. "Another doctor a day earlier had testified
that a fetus sometimes does not immediately die after limbs are pulled off."
Editor's Note: I assume
that most of you reading this page would not tear the arms and legs off of a newborn
baby, even one that was born prematurely. Murder is murder, whether it occurs
inside or outside the womb.
Ultrasound makes better decisions possible
Recent advances in the science of ultrasound have made it easier to see that a baby
is a living person long before it lives outside the womb.
Telling the truth
about abortion in Oklahoma. In an effort to provide the tools to make an informed decision
before murdering an unborn child a new law in Oklahoma requires women undergo a sonogram. During the
pre-abortion procedure the Oklahoma law also requires the attending physicians turn the screen toward the woman,
and describe fetal size, weight and facts such as, "number of fingers and toes and heart activity."
Planned Parenthood Director Quits After
Watching Abortion on Ultrasound. The former director of a Planned Parenthood clinic in
southeast Texas says she had a "change of heart" after watching an abortion last month — and
she quit her job and joined a pro-life group in praying outside the facility.
FNC
Interviews Fmr Planned Parenthood Clinic Exec Director Who Turned Pro-Life. On Saturday's
Huckabee show on FNC, host Mike Huckabee interviewed the former executive director of a Planned Parenthood
clinic in Bryan Texas, Abby Johnson, who became a pro-life activist after witnessing an ultrasound of an
abortion while she assisted in a procedure.
What Will It
Take To Change Minds On Abortion? The harsh truth is that we'll never be able to change the
status quo because abortion is riddled with lies and deceptions by the media and the power brokers of this
billion-dollar industry. Until we abandon the euphemistic phrase of "a woman's right to choose" and
replace it with the more accurate "a woman's right to kill her baby," Roe v. Wade will remain the
law of the land.
Pro-choice
legislators or thugs? A recent Pew Research Center poll and Gallup survey show support for abortion
rights are shrinking. The May Gallup poll showed 51 percent of Americans are pro-life, while 42 percent
are pro-choice. This is in no small part thanks to technology. Parents can now listen to their
child's heartbeat and see a picture of him or her in the womb early on in a woman's pregnancy, making it more
difficult to describe a baby as a "fetus" after that point.
The
Supreme Court and fundamental freedoms. Although he is absorbed in extraordinarily extensive
and imminent problems, President Obama, I hope, will find just an hour to look at, in a sonogram, developing
human beings before they are born. Then he might revoke his promise to join many congressional Democrats
in supporting the Freedom of Choice Act that annuls many states' restrictions on abortion, such as informed
consent, parental involvement and state-funding laws. If this is his first experience with what a
sonogram reveals, he may, as happened to a very pro-choice law professor I know, take a little more time
to see more of those unmistakable lives.
Invention Lets Pregnant Women Hold
Models of Their Unborn Babies. Pregnant women are being given the chance to hold life-sized models of
their unborn babies, thanks to an invention that converts data from ultrasound and MRI scans. Jorge Lopes, a
Brazilian designer, uses 3-D printing technology to create the plaster models, which went on display last month at
an exhibition at the Royal College of Art in London.
Georgia's
abortion debate: Senate Bill 429, the "Ultrasound Act," which so "horrifies"
pro-abortion activists, provides the opportunity — no more and no less — to
make a more informed decision.
More states consider mandating
ultrasounds before abortions. Abortion foes have a new tactic: The hope that women can't
look away. Lawmakers in 11 states are considering bills that would offer or require ultrasounds before a
woman gets an abortion. The most stringent are proposed laws in Nebraska, Indiana and Texas, which would
require a doctor show the ultrasound image of the fetus to the woman, despite legal challenges to a similar
measure in Oklahoma.
Abortion
and the politics of ultrasound. South Carolina appears close to becoming the first state in the
country to require that women considering an abortion view an ultrasound image of their fetus before deciding
to undergo the procedure. ... Opponents call it "intimidation" and "emotional blackmail" of women seeking to
abort.
Unborn
baby pictures fuel abortion debate. Prof Stuart Campbell, the ultrasound pioneer who
captured the images, said … he was "truly staggered" by their impact. "I just wanted to
educate couples about the development of a baby," he told The Daily Telegraph. The images
were compiled for his book "Watch Me Grow!" for would-be parents. "It never entered my head
that these pictures would have this effect, engendering a national debate on abortion, but seeing
an 11-week-old foetus doing quite sophisticated things opened my own eyes to the fact that we did
not know how rapidly the foetus developed," he said.
Women demand
tougher laws to curb abortions. A majority of women in Britain want the abortion laws
to be tightened to make it harder, or impossible, for them to terminate a pregnancy. ... Increased
awareness of the realities of abortion, and the impact of ultrasound images of a
23-week-old foetus smiling and grimacing, have made people change their views, said [Dr Austen]
Ivereigh. The latter 'very dramatically showed that what had been depersonalised in many people's minds
as a foetus was clearly seen to be a baby, a human being in formation, and that has come as a shock to
many people', he added.
A Window To The Womb: A few years ago a 7-8 week
fetus resembled a "glob of tissue." Now, with state of the art technology of 3D and transvaginal
sonography, we can observe fingers, toes and organs. We can watch the child kick, jump and wave his arms
and legs!
Unborn babies "smile" for the
camera. Astonishing images from inside the womb produced by new technology show babies apparently
smiling and crying.
Read this article:
Obama Would Let
Her Die. I can't help but ask the question: "Why does Obama pursue such outcomes?" Perhaps
it's because neither of his children have had anything but a beautiful life, and a pleasurable home to experience.
But do handicapped children deserve less from life because of some mental or physical limitation? … Last week,
Barack Obama called those of us who have told the truth about his position on this issue "liars." He said that
we were misrepresenting this issue and he attempted to claim confusion and "multiple bills" and "procedures" to cloud
the issue of his voting record. All of which itself was a lie.
Guilty consciences.
Why do social liberals say they want to make abortion "safe, legal and rare," but then spend all their time on
the first two and none on the third? It is relatively simple to reduce the number of abortions, even
while keeping them "safe" and "legal." Show the abortion-minded woman a sonogram of the fetus she is
about to destroy. A 2005 survey by Care Net, a network of about 1,000 antiabortion pregnancy centers in
the United States and Canada, based in Sterling, Va., found that "72 percent of women who were initially
'strong leaning' toward abortion decided to carry their pregnancies to term after seeing a sonogram."
That isn't depriving a woman of her "choice." It is providing more information so that her choice will
be fully informed.
Women Are Not
Delicate Little Flowers Despite What NARAL and Planned Parenthood Think. What really seems
to enrage NARAL and Planned Parenthood is when crisis pregnancy centers use ultra-sound devices, or other
methods, to show women pictures of their fetuses. To say that this is a "scare tactic" would be like
saying it is a "scare tactic" to show a man a picture of clogged arteries to try to get him to understand
his health situation.
Crist Vetoes Bill Requiring Ultrasound Before
Abortion. Gov. Charlie Crist vetoed a Republican-backed bill that would have required women seeking
a first-trimester abortion to pay for an ultrasound exam and, with few exceptions, view the image or have it
described to them by their doctor.
The extreme case of Toni Vernelli
Toni Vernelli is the ultimate environmentalist fruitcake: A misguided woman who brags that she aborted her
child years ago in an effort to help "save the earth." This story is at the intersection of two
topics: Abortion and
Earth-worshipping environmentalism. This
shows where rabid environmentalism is ultimately headed.
Meet
the women who won't have babies — because they're not eco friendly. Had Toni Vernelli
gone ahead with her pregnancy ten years ago, she would know at first hand what it is like to cradle her own
baby, to have a pair of innocent eyes gazing up at her with unconditional love, to feel a little hand slipping
into hers — and a voice calling her Mummy. But the very thought makes her shudder with
horror. Because when Toni terminated her pregnancy, she did so in the firm belief she was helping to
save the planet.
[Helping to save the planet from what, and for whom?]
Woman Aborts Child To Help
'Save' the Planet. A British woman who had an abortion 10 years ago and was
later sterilized did so because she believes pregnancy is bad for the environment, the London
Daily Mail reported Sunday. Toni Vernelli, 35, hopes her actions would ensure her carbon
footprint would be kept to a minimum, the Mail reported. The environmental advocate also
sees having children as an egotistical act.
[That sounds like a person with very low self-esteem.]
The
pitter-patter of carbon footprints. I've heard a lot of excuses in support of killing an unborn
child. Only one makes any real, believable sense; that it would save the mother's life. The rest
are, to varying degrees, bad or worse "reasons" to deny a human being all that a lifetime can offer. But
I think Toni Vernelli has quite possibly found not only the most loathsome excuse but also the most blatantly
absurd: to be environmentally friendly.
Cool it! You can
give birth. Good news! Kevin Rudd will next month stop global warming, so you won't have to
cull your children, too. He'll sign that Kyoto Protocol, and pfft — problem gone. Such a
relief, if a little late for Toni Vernelli, who works for PETA, the animal liberation group. Like all smart
people, Vernelli believes in apocalyptic man-made global warming. But she's not an Al Gore hypocrite,
flying around the world to tell mugs to cut the gases she's just blown out the back of her jet.
Children? Not
if you love the planet. [Scroll down] "Every person who is born," says Toni Vernelli,
"produces more rubbish, more pollution, more greenhouse gases and adds to the problem of overpopulation."
We are the pollution, and sterilization is the solution. The best way to bequeath a more sustainable
environment to our children is not to have any. What's the "pro-choice" line? "Every child should
be wanted"? Not anymore. The progressive position has subtly evolved: Every child should be
unwanted.
Stem Cell Research
Inconvenient
facts about stem cell research: When he announced his policy expanding federal funding of
embryonic stem cell research, President Barack Obama was not timid about proclaiming its benefits. It
would, he announced, hasten "a day when words like 'terminal' and 'incurable' are finally retired from our
vocabulary." You thought Obama wanted to establish death panels? Actually, he seems to think he
can confer immortality.
Subscription required to read the entire article. Highly recommended.
Stem cell freeze. [Scroll down] The
lawsuit alleges that NIH violated administrative rules this year as it rushed to fulfill President Obama's
executive order to write new guidelines for ESC funding. The agency allowed only 34 days for the
public to offer input on its proposed guidelines, and it appears to have ignored comments (about 30,000 out
of 49,000) that questioned the usefulness of the research on ethical or scientific grounds. "They had
no interest in listening to the public," said Casey. Federal attorneys in their initial response to
the plaintiffs' claims said that NIH didn't have to follow administrative law to the letter because it was
acting on orders from the president. "That is a startling claim of executive power. Simply
amazing," said Thomas Hungar, Casey's colleague at Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher.
The Editor says...
Read that again. It's okay to circumvent the law, because Obama gives his permission. That is a
sure sign of dictatorship.
U.S. court rules against Obama's stem cell
policy. A U.S. district court issued a preliminary injunction on Monday [8/23/2010] stopping
federal funding of human embryonic stem cell research, in a slap to the Obama administration's new guidelines
on the sensitive issue. The court ruled in favor of a suit filed in June by researchers who said human
embryonic stem cell research involved the destruction of human embryos.
Science
Over All? What you think of [Obama's] policy depends on what you think of the moral status of
embryos. If (as modern biology informs us) conception initiates a human life, and if (as the Declaration
of Independence asserts) every human life is equally deserving of some minimal protections, government support
for the destruction of human embryos for research raises profound moral problems. But if you think an
embryo is not quite a person, or that its immaturity or inability to suffer pain or its other qualities mean
that destroying an embryo does not amount to taking a life, the promise of stem cell science might well
outweigh any doubts.
Crucial Differences
Between Non-Embryonic and Embryonic Stem Cells. We hear a lot about "stem cells," which are front-and-center
as a major policy debate in America, one that involves science, medicine, ethics, politics, and much more. ... A stem cell
is a type of cell that is nonspecific in its function; in contrast, for instance, to a heart or brain cell, which is
functionally specific. There are two major sources of stem cells: embryonic stem cells and non-embryonic
stem cells. Embryonic stem cells are obtained from 5- to 12-day old embryos. Although removal of a
stem cell from an embryo kills the embryo, the stem cells are valued for their potential to produce any type of
cell. That is, they have high plasticity.
Decades Away: The Dirty Secret of Embryonic Stem Cell
Research. An age of medical miracles is dawning. Obama administration federal funding rules for embryonic
stem cells, or ES cells, will open wide the money floodgates for "the most remarkable potential of any scientific discovery
ever made with respect to human health." It has "the capacity to cure maladies of all sorts, including cancer, heart
disease, Parkinson's, Alzheimer's," and spinal cord injuries. Or so says Sen. Arlen Specter (D-Pa.) among others.
But paraplegics shouldn't post their wheelchairs on EBay just yet. If these cures are just around the corner, this
corner is far, far away. And that's according to ES cell researchers and funding advocates themselves.
The
Great Stem-Cell-Research Scam. Medical-research insiders know that embryonic-stem-cell technol ogy is
proving a dead end — Dr. Bernadine Healy, a former director of the National Institutes of Health and once
an ES-cell-research enthusiast, calls it "obsolete." But the Obama administration has opened wide the
federal funding floodgates — the triumph of a big special-interest PR and lobbying campaign. In fact,
the research will line the pockets of a relatively few individuals — at considerable cost for the rest
of us, since the funding means billions that won't go to more promising areas.
The Dogma of Mad
Science. Dr. Frankenstein would have felt "empowered" on Monday, March 9. That's the
day the Obama Administration not only reversed the Bush Administration's restrictions on embryonic stem cell
research, but announced that it was freeing science from outside interference, such as people's moral qualms.
Winning Smugly. On Monday [3/9/2009], President
Obama lifted the ban on federal funding of stem-cell research using destroyed human embryos. If you
support this research, congratulations: You won. Now for your next challenge: Don't lose
your soul.
Obama 'guarantees'
stem cell work. President Obama on Thursday gave lawmakers his "guarantee" he will sign an
executive order overturning President Bush's embryonic stem cell research policy. Meeting with House
Democrats holding a retreat here, Mr. Obama answered a question from Rep. James R. Langevin, a Rhode
Island Democrat who is a paraplegic, by saying he will sign the order, according to three sources who were in
the closed-door part of the meeting.
Stem cell research may not
find wonder cures. Stem cell research, we have long been told, should pave the way for
revolutionary new treatments to help millions of patients around the world. Yet despite the years of
study and debate about the potential, therapies have been slow to materialise. Even the head of the UK
National Stem Cell Network has now conceded that stem cell research may never deliver new treatments.
Abortion
at heart of stem-cell debate. I wouldn't dare try to explain the science of the
new discovery last week that promises to shift the agonizing debate about embryonic stem cells.
But if the science is right, mature human skin cells can be manipulated in laboratories to act as
embryonic stem cells and replace damaged or diseased cells in human beings.
Superior Stem Cells Shunned
By Media. Each year there are stunning breakthroughs with adult stem cells, and 2007 has already
brought its first. Adult stem cells cure and treat more than 70 diseases and are involved in almost
1,300 human clinical trials. Scientists also keep discovering that adult stem cells are capable of
creating a wider variety of mature cells. ... This has caused great consternation on the part of those
seeking increased taxpayer embryonic stem cell funds. The reason is that there are currently
no practical applications for this type of cell.
Please
Ignore the Man Behind the Fetal Stem Cell Initiative's Curtain. Proponents of Missouri's proposed
fetal stem cell proposition are more concerned about receiving a blank check from the taxpayers than science.
Pro-Life
Dems Face Tough Ride on Embryonic Research. With Congress set to vote Thursday on legislation
to increase funding for embryonic stem cell research, many observers of the debate are wondering how newly
elected pro-life Democrats will vote on the issue. The bill introduced Friday [1/10/2007] is identical
to H.R. 810. That measure was passed last year but vetoed by President Bush who opposes stem cell
research that requires human embryos which are killed in the process.
Democrats target stem
cells. The new Democrat-led congress this week geared for battle against federal financing limits
on embryonic stem cell research set by the White House and its conservative allies on moral grounds.
Democrats, who took control of congress last Thursday for the first time in 12 years, plan to fire a
legislative salvo exactly a week later which they expect will trigger a veto by President George W. Bush.
The Democrat's "Embryonic Stem Cell"
Fraud Road Show. The problem with this scenario is that is it a colossal fraud. In fact,
embryonic stem cell research has produced no usable cures for anything much less Parkinson's while adult stem
cell research, which Missouri Senator Jim Talent and every other Republican candidate favor
expanding, has produced results.
Stem Cells: Embryonic vs.
Non-Embryonic. The vagueness of the term "stem cell research" is one of the biggest problems in
the ongoing stem cell debate. Writers, debaters, scientists, public figures and politicians should
differentiate between "embryonic stem cell research" and "non-embryonic stem cell research" in order to
keep the meanings clear.
Democrats
play politics with human life. The Senate on Tuesday [7/18/2006] debated three important
bills: Castle-DeGette, which expands federal funding for stem-cell research that kills human embryos;
Santorum-Specter, which funds new research that uses the latest techniques to obtain embryonic-like stem
cells without actually destroying embryos; and Brownback-Santorum, which would ban "fetal farming" or the
practice of growing human fetuses for the purpose of using their body parts. All three of these bills
ask the fundamental question: What kind of people are we?
Science's
Stem Cell Scam: Embryonic stem cells (ESCs) receive tremendous media attention, with oft-repeated
claims that they have the potential to cure virtually every disease known. Yet there are spoilsports,
self included, who point out that they have yet to even make it into a human clinical trial. This is
even as alternatives — adult stem cells (ASCs) from numerous places in the body as well as umbilical
cord blood and placenta — are curing diseases here and now and have been doing so for
decades. And that makes ESC advocates very, very angry.
Bush Signs
"Fetus Farming Prohibition Act". The bill President Bush signed today draws a clear line against
one of the most egregious abuses in biomedical research and prohibits trafficking in human fetuses that are
created with the sole intent of aborting them to harvest their parts.
President Bush's Stem Cell
Research Policy
The veto:
Yesterday [7/19/2006] President Bush vetoed a bill that, had it become law, would have deeply eroded respect
for human life. It was a courageous act because there was enormous pressure on him to agree to fund more
embryo-destructive research. After vetoing this bill, the president signed one for funding research into
methods of creating pluripotent stem cells — the kind that can be turned into many types of body
tissue without creating or killing human embryos.
Stem Cell Research: Destroying
the Seeds of the Next Generation. President Bush quoted the ethicist who told
him "that cluster of cells is the same way you and I, and all the rest of us, started our
lives;" they are "the seeds of the next generation." That premise should affect all
judgments about stem cell research because the embryo is in fact a human baby.
The doctor is
out. Adult and cord-blood stem cells — which scientists can obtain without
killing anything — have shown extraordinary healing capabilities. Researchers have
used adult cells in ameliorating more than 70 diseases or conditions; cord-blood cells, more than
40. But embryonic stem cells have not produced a single therapeutic breakthrough. On
the contrary, the cells have shown an unsettling tendency to grow wildly — creating
cancers, instead of cures.
Latest
Assault on the Preborn: Embryonic stem cell research is neither an acceptable
nor an ethical means of scientific discovery but is instead the purely utilitarian,
cold-blooded murder of preborn children.
Medical
Cannibalism: The entire purpose of the embryonic stem cell controversy has been
to advance a new collectivist medical ethic.
Embryos made
to order: Jennalee Ryan of Texas advertises "The World's First Human Embryo Bank" online.
There's no need for would-be parents to settle for already-born babies or leftover embryos from couples with
fertility issues. … Her group, The Abraham Center of Life, uses sperm donors only with college
degrees — although "most of them have doctorate degrees" — while most egg donors
have some college.
"Personhood" wins Colorado court nod. The
Colorado Supreme Court on Tuesday [11/14/2007] gave the go-ahead to proponents of a ballot initiative
seeking to amend the state constitution in 2008 to define personhood as a fertilized egg. Opponents
to the measure, which would lay the foundation to make abortion illegal in the state, challenged the ballot
title as misleading to voters. The court ruled in a 7-0 decision that it is clear and meets the state
requirement for a single-subject ballot question.
Fetuses harvested for cosmetic
procedures: The repulsive new world of human sacrifice. Lawyers love to talk about the
slippery slope, how you bend the rules a little or do something a little wrong and it leads inevitably to
worse. But sometimes the slope turns into a precipice and you find yourself looking into the
abyss. Use of fetal tissue for cosmetic purposes — especially fetal tissue conceived only for
that purpose — is such precipitous plunge.
New Embryonic Stem Cell Study is Just Smoke and
Mirrors. Bioethics professor C. Ben Mitchell says that a Massachusetts laboratory's claim
to have developed a new way to derive embryonic stem cells without harming embryos is just "ethical
smoke and mirrors."
Stem-cell prober sacked: Came
too close to truth? In the midst of growing interest in reports of a gruesome stem-cell and
human-organ black market that traffics in newborn babies taken from their mothers, an investigator looking into
the matter has been sacked "for political reasons," she says, because she was getting too close to the truth.
Good News on Stem Cells: Scientists
in Japan and the United States have now found a way to reprogram skin cells back to an embryonic
state. ... If this new technique can be applied to humans — so far, it has been performed
only on mice — the debate on stem cell research is over. If skin cells can be used to create stem
cells, who will argue that it is necessary to destroy embryos for the same purpose?
Science
trumps spin. The day Christopher Reeve died … at an event in Iowa, John Edwards, then the
Democrats' nominee for vice president, said: "If we do the work that we can do in this country, the work
that we will do when John Kerry is president, people like Christopher Reeve are going to walk, get up out of
that wheelchair and walk again." The usual suspects were outraged. But he was not universally
condemned as the shameless demagogue that he is….
Scientific
Manipulation and the Dignity of Man. Popular culture is blindly embracing science and ignoring
legitimate moral concerns. Human dignity is steadily being eroded in the pursuit of the "advancement of
science" and the quest for "cures." Increasingly, we are losing our common understanding of what it
means to be a human being, and the idea that human beings are something "special" is rapidly becoming an
antiquated notion.
Too Many
Eggs in Obama's Basket. Unfortunately, the stem cell debate has been characterized as a conflict
between science (as though science is always right) and religious "kooks" (as though religious folk are never
right). In choosing sides, it is, indeed, easier to imagine lunch with a researcher who wants to
resurrect Christopher Reeve (whom Obama couldn't resist mentioning) and make him walk again, than with the
corner protester holding a fetus in a jar.
Scientific horrors:
President Barack Obama has now reversed President Bush's ban on U.S. taxpayer funding for stem cell research
with human embryos. ... [The decision] was sold superficially by means of false hope to those who suffer from
such diseases as Alzheimer's and Parkinson's. They were told that cures were being prevented by
restrictions on research, when there can be no guarantees that such cures will emerge. But more deeply,
a sick juxtaposition has been presented between "science" and "religion," in which the proponents of stem cell
research with human embryos have demonized their opponents as something worse than "backward" and indifferent
to human suffering.
Let's pass up the
chance to buy some killer stem cell research. When the pro-life Bush was in office, medical practitioners
possessed of a functioning conscience didn't need the protection. But now that they need it, they can't have it.
On some matters, the new administration is in no mood to allow conscientious objectors. We're all in this together,
even when "this" is what a lot of us consider murder.
Stem Cells and the Truth About Medical
Innovation. Along with championing more funding for stem cells, [Obama has] issued a budget that
advocates importation of drugs from countries with price controls (as a way to introduce those price restrictions
into the U.S. market). He plans to give a Medicare agency that's short on clinical expertise the power to pay
only for medical products that it "judges" to be the "least costly alternative" for treating a particular condition.
He's also creating a new federal agency to make decisions about the comparative value of different medical products,
with new biotech drugs at the top of the list.
Journey To
Destruction. "A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step," said Confucius.
But a journey of whatever length presumes one has a destination in mind. With President Obama's
executive order authorizing expanded federal funding for research using stem cells, produced from the
destruction of human embryos, the destination will be left up to scientists, as will any "speed
controls." The sky, or in this case the depths, will be the limit.
Stem cell payoff could take decades not days. For all
the past week's headlines about embryonic stem cells' medical promise there is a sobering reality: The science to
prove that promise will take years, probably too long for many of today's seriously ill.
Obama: destroying human life
for the 'greater good'. On March 9th President Obama's executive order reversed the Bush administration's
long-standing restrictions on using federal funds for embryonic stem cells research and authorized the destruction of live
human embryos in medical experimentation. The administration ignored the promising results from adult stem cell
therapies. It reopened a Pandora's Box of bioethical concerns and raised vocal opposition from many Christian
leaders, including 191 Catholic bishops.
Kill One, Save None.
Most pro-life conservatives believe that Congress should have banned federal involvement in human embryonic stem cell
research based on the fact that it destroys a human being. We believe that the nation should never approve the destruction
of living human beings to preserve or promote the health of other living human beings in the name of science.
Liberals, time to face
the truth. The flourishing liberal dictum that the public should keep its paws off the funding
and practice of science is a serious and dangerous fabrication. Among liberal rhetoricians, this erroneous
diktat blossomed when then-President George W. Bush limited federal funding of embryonic stem-cell research.
They said Bush and others with moral qualms about destroying human life to advance scientific knowledge were
"anti-science." So, when the political left found they could advance their own scientific agenda by
painting conservatives as anti-science, the slander became an embedded component of liberal group think.
Back to News from the Culture War
Back to Feminism and Abortion -- index page
Back to the Home page
|
|
