Washington, D.C.—Last month, for the first time in history, the House of Representatives passed legislation that requires taxpayers to fund science that ends innocent human lives for the questionable potential of improving the lives of others. Soon the Senate and potentially President Bush will decide if forcing taxpayers to fund life-destructing, unpromising research crosses moral boundaries. This legislation would divert resources from truly promising treatments in favor of controversial research whose benefits remain speculation.  

I believe we have a moral obligation to pursue treatments and cures for people with devastating ailments.   This is why I am for scientifically sound, ethical adult stem cell research. 

Embryonic stem cell research requires the killing of thousands of embryos, persons at the beginning of life.  There is no question this debate is about the inherent value of human life at its earliest stage.  However, supporters of embryonic stem cell research will not take a position on when life begins.  If they did, they could not sustain their argument.  

Moral arguments aside, what you’re not hearing about this debate is the absolute fact that other forms of stem cell research are resulting in treatments for people who suffer from debilitating diseases.  Adult stem cells, which are extracted from umbilical cord blood, placenta, bone marrow, nasal mucosa, hair follicles and fat cells, are today successfully used in treating real people who suffer from at least 58 specific diseases.  Successes include, among the 58 diseases, Parkinson´s Disease, Crohn´s Disease, diabetes, spinal cord injury, strokes, arthritis, and numerous cancers, including breast, brain and leukemia.  

Conversely, no one can name a single person who has been helped by embryonic stem cell research.  Embryonic stem cells may never produce a safe and effective treatment for any disease.  The political hype declaring them a cure-all today gives false hope to many people desperate for a cure.  If successful, however, the necessary next step must be to clone the cells.  It is logistically impossible to provide enough embryonic stem cells without human cloning.  

It is simply untrue that the embryos in question would otherwise be thrown away.  The embryos were not created for research.  Every embryo was created for the sole purpose of giving parenthood to those who ache for it.  Right now, over ninety percent of frozen embryos are stored by their parents who hope to have more children or to give other couples the chance for adoption.  At least 500,000 couples are on waiting lists to adopt children.  For each available embryo, 45 couples wait in line to adopt that child.  

So far, over 80 formerly frozen embryos have been adopted by families.  Now these “snowflake babies” are giggling, screaming, playful children.  It is a glorious miracle for couples who imagined they would never experience parenthood, much less pregnancy and childbirth.  These “snowflakes” some of whom were frozen for nine years, are as worthy of our protection as every child.  Their parents do not think they are medical waste.  

Proponents of this research say they cannot look a paraplegic in the eye and say “We can’t experiment on frozen embryos.”  I can’t hold these children and say, “I wish we had.” 

The American medical community has many times refused the results of critical research because the findings were achieved unethically.  International standards for Permissible Medical Experiments are clear.  The subject must be a volunteer, there must be no alternative, results of animal experimentation must have been proven successful, the subject must be able to voluntarily end the experiment, there must be no possibility of injury, disability, or death, and the promise must outweigh the risk.  Embryonic stem cell research violates each of these principles.  Principles for the Permissible Medical Experiments may be found in the military tribunals under Control Council Law No.10, October, 1946, Nuremberg.