Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Passion of the Christ Star Jim Caviezel Explains Opposition to Embryo Research
LifeSite ^ | November 6, 2006 | Meg Jalsevac

Posted on 11/07/2006 8:02:24 AM PST by NYer

Monday November 6, 2006

Passion of the Christ Star Jim Caviezel Explains Opposition to Embryo Research
His Opposition to Michael J. Fox's Stem-Cell Ads

By Meg Jalsevac

HOLLYWOOD, November 6, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Actor Jim Caviezel is defending his stance against Michael J. Fox’s campaign ad which was used to promote politicians who support embryonic stem cell research.  Caviezel insists that he is sympathetic to Fox’s condition but wants to ensure that the public is informed of all the facts before they cast their votes.   

Fox’s ad encouraged Missourians to vote ‘Yes’ on Amendment 2 which would allow scientists in the state of Missouri to use human embryos for their research.  Caviezel and several other celebrities appeared in a rebuttal ad clip which encouraged Missourians to vote ‘No’ after explaining the facts surrounding the proposed amendment.

About the ad, Caviezel says, "I really care about people and the public. I believe the public needs to be informed. What they decide to choose is their choice, but I care very much."

Caviezel says he is "absolutely for adult stem-cell research.”  Adult stem-cell research is looked on as an ethical form of stem-cell research because it does not destroy embryonic life in the research process. 

Caviezel says, “I care very much about people who have diseases, especially Parkinson's disease, and I'd be through the moon if they ever came up with a cure for any of those diseases, especially Parkinson's."          

The election in Missouri has focused largely on the Missouri Stem Cell Research and Cures Initiative – also called Amendment 2.  Among other things, the amendment claims that it would ban human cloning and the buying and selling of human eggs.  In fact, the amendment only prohibits implanting a human clone in a woman – not creating a clone for research purposes.  It also allows for “reimbursement” for human eggs including all expenses and “lost wages of the donor”.    

Read Related LifeSiteNews Coverage:

Sad to see Michael J. Fox Suffer But Sadder Still that he's been Deceived on Embryo Research
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2006/nov/06110106.html

Neurologist Says Rush Limbaugh Criticism of Fox Technically Inaccurate But Likely Close to Mark
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2006/oct/06103102.html

Michael J. Fox is Right About One Thing: Pro-life Movement Must Oppose IVF
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2006/oct/06103006.html

Actor Jim Caviezel Battles Michael J. Fox on Embryonic Stem Cell Video Ads
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2006/oct/06102501.html


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Extended News; Philosophy; US: Missouri
KEYWORDS: catholic; caviezel; embryo; esc; fox; prolife; stemcell
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-105 next last

1 posted on 11/07/2006 8:02:27 AM PST by NYer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Lady In Blue; Salvation; narses; SMEDLEYBUTLER; redhead; Notwithstanding; nickcarraway; Romulus; ...
Catholic Ping
Please freepmail me if you want on/off this list


2 posted on 11/07/2006 8:02:59 AM PST by NYer (Apart from the cross, there is no other ladder by which we may get to Heaven. St. Rose of Lima)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer

Voted against it this morning. I hope Missourians are guided by their hearts.


3 posted on 11/07/2006 8:04:44 AM PST by rightinthemiddle (Without the Media, the Left and Islamofacists are Nothing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer

Please put me on your list. Thank you. Kelli


4 posted on 11/07/2006 8:08:14 AM PST by newconhere (bzzzzzzzzzzzzzz. zap)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: NYer

Mr. Caviezel is welcome to use my argument; that there is no difference between destroyng an embryo for stem cells and harvesting organs from prisoners, ala China.


5 posted on 11/07/2006 8:16:36 AM PST by yooling (I don't have anything nice to say...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer

Isn't there a picture rule for posts about Jim Caviezel? :-)


6 posted on 11/07/2006 8:25:15 AM PST by Juana la Loca (Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuma)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Juana la Loca
Isn't there a picture rule for posts about Jim Caviezel? :-)

What she said!

7 posted on 11/07/2006 8:37:23 AM PST by MJemison
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Juana la Loca
Isn't there a picture rule for posts about Jim Caviezel? :-)

What she said!

8 posted on 11/07/2006 8:37:42 AM PST by MJemison
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: NYer
Okay, the Jesus character is against embryonic stem cell research...but, please, somebody explain to me why he and others see this as infanticide? It is my understanding most of the embryos in question are "owned" by couples who produced them in homes of eventually impregnating one inside a womb and producing a living, breathing human baby. But it is also my understanding that they are tossed when same said couples no longer want them or want to continue paying for their maintenance in cryrogentic friges...AND, it is my BELIEF that an embryo is just that--an embryo--until it is implanted and becomes capable of becoming fetal material. Furthermore, most birth control methods (exception condoms and certain other devices) do not prevent conception but the same said implantation (especially the RU287 "morning after" that Bush approved), therefore why the rub?
9 posted on 11/07/2006 8:46:54 AM PST by meandog (While Bush will never fill them, Clinton isn't fit to even lick the soles of Reagan's shoes!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: meandog

Exactly. Very, very few of these embryos will ever become the "snowflake" babies so many in the "culture of life" crowd crow about. Since they're destined to be destroyed anyways, best their at least put to some use. Adult stem cells go a long way, I know, but certain organs, notably the pancreas in Type I diabetes (a devastating disease for those--mostly young people--who suffer from it) are not helped by adult stem cells; there is no adult stem cell for the pancreas. For them, embryonic stem cells are the only hope.


10 posted on 11/07/2006 8:52:54 AM PST by ruffedgrouse (Think outside the box, dammit!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: NYer

Can anyone explain to me why there's opposition to research with embyonic stem cells, when the embryos being used for research are going to be discarded anyway and not used for reproduction?

I don't see this as any different than organ donation. If a parent's child dies, that parent is entitled to say the child's organs can be re-used to help others. If a parent no longer needs the surplus embryos, why isn't it that parent's right to allow the embryo to be used to help others?

It puzzles the heck out of me.

It seems the opposition is misplaced - if a person is against destroying surplus embryos, that person should be against in-vitro fertilization, since that's what creates the surplus embryos anyway.


11 posted on 11/07/2006 8:54:22 AM PST by Air Force Brat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: meandog

I see we have the same question. See my comment No. 11 below.


12 posted on 11/07/2006 8:55:58 AM PST by Air Force Brat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: meandog

Totally non related issue...but I checked out your homepage. Why is JEB Stuart in your neutral American section?


13 posted on 11/07/2006 8:57:14 AM PST by James Ewell Brown Stuart (Go back and do your duty as I have done mine. I would rather die than be whipped!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Juana la Loca; MJemison

Don't complain when we guys post girlie pics!

14 posted on 11/07/2006 8:57:32 AM PST by GraniteStateConservative (...He had committed no crime against America so I did not bring him here...-- Worst.President.Ever.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Juana la Loca

Here you go.

15 posted on 11/07/2006 8:58:21 AM PST by A_perfect_lady ("If it's not the Crusades, it's the cartoons." -GWB)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: NYer

Doctor Dean Edell also criticized this actor while defending Fox.


16 posted on 11/07/2006 8:58:43 AM PST by RightWhale (RTRA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Juana la Loca

If there isn't one, there should be!


17 posted on 11/07/2006 9:01:35 AM PST by Jaded ("I have a mustard- seed; and I am not afraid to use it."- Joseph Ratzinger)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: NYer; All
Just have a second, but Jim Caviezel's opposition to embryonic stem cell research is because he knows the TRUTH!!! The truth proves that embryonic/fetal stem cell research is a horrible gruesome crime against humanity. The FACTS are HERE" http://www.angelfire.com/blog/stemcells/ . Please FReep this page and pass it around.
18 posted on 11/07/2006 9:01:52 AM PST by TexasPatriot8 (Issues matter. The Democrats can Foley & Macaca all they want to. They're still wrong on the issues!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: meandog

First of all, Bush didn't "approve" the morning after pill. You fell for the spin. Once the genie was already out of the bottle, there was a debate over whether or not minors should be able to get the drug over the counter and Bush said that they should be required to get a prescription. The press spun that into "Bush says teens should be able to get morning after pill with a prescription!"

As for the whole "unused" embryo argument. Yes, there are people who have no trouble discarding/destroying them. But that doesn't mean pro-lifers have ever been OK with it, just because it is legal. I believe the Catholic position is, in vitro fertilization is OK, so long as all the embryos are implanted, there are no "selective abortions" and/or the embryos are donated to another couple for implantation. The reason the McCougheys had seven babies is because they respected the life of each embryo and refused to abort any of them when their implantation was successful.


19 posted on 11/07/2006 9:02:07 AM PST by soccermom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: NYer

The man who was robbed of the most deserving Oscar of all time...he is forever blessed.


20 posted on 11/07/2006 9:03:11 AM PST by My Favorite Headache ("Head-On...Apply Directly To The Forehead, Head-On...Apply Directly To The Forehead")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-105 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson