Once an Embryo…(U. S. Bishops Issue Statement on Embryonic Stem Cell Research)

CatholicExchange from Priests for Life ^ | 06-23-08 | Father Frank Pavone

[Salvation]

Once an Embryo…

June 23rd, 2008 by Fr. Frank Pavone

The US bishops have issued a very clear statement on embryonic stem cell research. It does not dwell upon the scientific nuances of the issue, but rather assists the reader to focus on the moral issues involved. The statement is not marked by condemnation, but rather by explanation. It is not a rejection of research or of those who stand to benefit from research, but rather a call to pursue the well being of those very individuals by preserving the moral standards that protect their dignity and that of the rest of us.

The statement reminds us that there is great medical promise in therapy with “adult stem cells,” which “can be obtained without harm to the donor and without any ethical problem.”

On the other hand, if human lives are destroyed for what some argue is the greater good of curing disease, this argument undermines the dignity of the very people for whom it tries to advocate. “The same ethic that justifies taking some lives to help the patient with Parkinson’s or Alzheimer’s disease today can be used to sacrifice that very patient tomorrow, if his or her survival is viewed as disadvantaging other human beings.”

Addressing the doubt some have as to whether embryos really are human, the statement reminds us, “Just as each of us was once an adolescent, a child, a newborn infant, and a child in the womb, each of us was once an embryo.”

And for those who acknowledge the humanity of the embryo but not its claim to protection, the bishops warn, “If fundamental rights such as the right to life are based on abilities or qualities that can appear or disappear, grow or diminish, and be greater or lesser in different human beings, then there are no inherent human rights, no true human equality, only privileges for the strong.”

The bottom line is that human beings can never be considered a means to an end or a mere object of research. The moral boundary of human activity in every sphere can be summarized by saying that people are not things. Every human being is a human person, and a person is never a product. From pornography to abortion, from economic oppression to unjustified warfare, from the Holocaust to the destruction of embryos, the violation of the same principle can be seen. The only appropriate response to the human person is love.

The Church in no way opposes research or the progress of medical science. Indeed, this statement is an affirmation of that fact, because by reaffirming where the bright moral lines are that research must never cross, the Church encourages researchers to work harder to discover alternatives that provide the benefits we all seek while preserving the moral foundation that provides the rationale for seeking those benefits in the first place. And those alternatives are coming to light — a fact which can help even those who justify the destruction of embryos to realize that there is no reason to take that path.

 

(This update courtesy of the Priests for Life newsletter. You may contact Priests for Life at PO Box 141172, Staten Island, NY 10314; call 1-888-PFL-3448 or 718-980-4400; fax 718-980-6515; mail@priestsforlife.org; www.priestsforlife.org.)

[Salvation]

For your information and discussion.

Open thread.

[Salvation]

Catholic Discussion Ping!

Please notify me via FReepmail if you would like to be added to or taken off the Catholic Discussion Ping List.

[Domandred]

What shall we do with embryos that were used for invitro for people that couldn’t otherwise get pregnant? Box them? Let them sit on a self till they are no longer viable? Stop allowing invitro because not all the embryos are used? Force couples to use all the embryos? Force the embryos to be used for invitro by others besides the genetic Mother and Father.

These are all questions that I when people start on the morals of embryo use.

[Salvation]

Are you aware of the stand of the Catholic Church on invitro fertilization?

[Salvation]

For your information.

   

2377 Techniques involving only the married couple (homologous artificial insemination and fertilization) are perhaps less reprehensible, yet remain morally unacceptable. They dissociate the sexual act from the procreative act. The act which brings the child into existence is no longer an act by which two persons give themselves to one another, but one that "entrusts the life and identity of the embryo into the power of doctors and biologists and establishes the domination of technology over the origin and destiny of the human person. Such a relationship of domination is in itself contrary to the dignity and equality that must be common to parents and children." "Under the moral aspect procreation is deprived of its proper perfection when it is not willed as the fruit of the conjugal act, that is to say, of the specific act of the spouses' union . . . . Only respect for the link between the meanings of the conjugal act and respect for the unity of the human being make possible procreation in conformity with the dignity of the person."

---

 

 

2376 Techniques that entail the dissociation of husband and wife, by the intrusion of a person other than the couple (donation of sperm or ovum, surrogate uterus), are gravely immoral. These techniques (heterologous artificial insemination and fertilization) infringe the child's right to be born of a father and mother known to him and bound to each other by marriage. They betray the spouses' "right to become a father and a mother only through each other."

---

[philly-d-kidder]

The Problem with Most Couple with fertilization Problems is the side effect of Contraception they hate to tell you about! 4.5 years on the Pill it virtually sterilizes the women! That is why the Emergency contraception Takes 30-45 days of Contraception and you ingest it at once and many become infertile as a result... the Unfortunate side effect!

Besides the world health Organization declared July 29th 2005 oral Contraception a Group one Carcinogen agent!Think Cigarettes!

[Sun]

‘“Just as each of us was once an adolescent, a child, a newborn infant, and a child in the womb, each of us was once an embryo.”’

Yep, and if any one of us, or anyone we love, were killed when we were an embryo, we would not be here today.

[Salvation]

**side effect of Contraception they hate to tell you about!**

This is so sad. Why couples should try Natural Family Planning instead.

[Salvation]

Journey to the Truth (Natural Family Planning) [Open]

Enslaving Women One Pill at a Time (Birth Control Pills and Natural Family Planning)

New Study Shows Natural Family Planning Technique More “Effective” Than Contraception

Fargo) Diocese set to require pre-marriage course in natural family planning

Making Babies: A Very Different Look at Natural Family Planning

Clerical Contraception (Important Read! By Fr. Thomas J. Euteneuer)

(Fargo) Diocese set to require pre-marriage course in natural family planning

Natural Family Planning Awareness Week, July 25, 2004

IS NATURAL FAMILY PLANNING A 'HERESY'? (Trads, please take note)

Thanks Doc: More (and Younger) Doctors Support Natural Family Planning

Couple say Natural Family Planning strengthens marriage

Reflections: Natural family planning vs sexism

British Medical Journal: Natural Family Planning= Effective Birth Control Supported by Catholic Chrch

Natural Family Planning

[Salvation]

Almost like the bumper sticker says:

Aren't you glad your mother didn't have an abortion?

[Sun]

Yes! and that’s a good one.

It reminds me of what Ronald Reagan said, that the people who are for abortion have already been born.

[philly-d-kidder]

I believe in NFP creighton but Iwas talking about Facts and Contraception!

[8mmMauser]

Pinged from Terri Dailies

8mm

[Tax-chick]

And for those who acknowledge the humanity of the embryo but not its claim to protection, the bishops warn, “If fundamental rights such as the right to life are based on abilities or qualities that can appear or disappear, grow or diminish, and be greater or lesser in different human beings, then there are no inherent human rights, no true human equality, only privileges for the strong.”

Raucous round of applause, a Guinness, and a kitten to the Bishops for getting to the real point.

[Tax-chick]

You seem to think those points are relevant to the morality of killing human beings for medical research. They are not.

It is wrong to kill human beings for medical research ... even if the human beings are very tiny. Even if it’s unlikely they’ll ever be in a position to develop more fully. Even if a series of wrong decisions has left them in a position with no future. Even if they’re old. Even if they’re sick or dying. Even if they’re mentally or physically handicapped. Even if they’re poor, or Jewish, or Puerto Rican, or illiterate.

[Coleus]

U.S. Bishops' Statement "On Embryonic Stem Cell Research" (June 2008)

EXCERPT:

Issued by USCCB, June 13, 2008, (To order a copy of this statement, please visit www.usccbpublishing.org and click on “New Titles.”)

On Embryonic Stem Cell Research

A Statement of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops

Stem cell research has captured the imagination of many in our society. Stem cells are relatively unspecialized cells that, when they divide, can replicate themselves and also produce a variety of more specialized cells. Scientists hope these biological building blocks can be directed
to produce many types of cells to repair the human body, cure disease, and alleviate suffering. Stem cells from adult tissues, umbilical cord blood, and placenta (often loosely called “adult stem cells”) can be obtained without harm to the donor and without any ethical problem, and
these have already demonstrated great medical promise. But some scientists are most intrigued by stem cells obtained by destroying an embryonic human being in the first week or so of development. Harvesting these “embryonic stem cells” involves the deliberate killing of innocent human beings, a gravely immoral act. Yet some try to justify it by appealing to a hoped-for future benefit to others.

[Arthur McGowan]

What shall we do with embryos that were used for invitro for people that couldn’t otherwise get pregnant? Box them? Let them sit on a self till they are no longer viable?

This is the most difficult of all your questions. The answer is that they should be "adopted" by willing couples, like any other orphans. Obviously, this is more difficult than the adoption process in the case of children who have already been born. They should NOT be killed--because this is murder. It may be that the only moral alternative available is to keep them alive until they are no longer "viable," at which point, thawing them out would not be murder.

Stop allowing invitro because not all the embryos are used?

Yes. In vitro fertilization is immoral in itself, because it is a violation of the child's right to be conceived naturally, in a marital act between the child's mother and father.

Force couples to use all the embryos?

No. In vitro should not be allowed in the first place, so the question of forcing people to "use" embryos should not arise at all.

Force the embryos to be used for invitro by others besides the genetic Mother and Father.

If you mean "Force other people to adopt the embryos" the answer would have to be No. If you mean "Require that embryos that are 'unwanted' be made available to couples who are willing to 'adopt' them," then the answer would have to be Yes.

[Arthur McGowan]

The contraceptors, without intending it, are often sterilizing themselves. Thus, the non-contraceptors will eventually TAKE OVER THE WORLD. The downside is that so many of the non-contraceptors are Muslim. So missionary activity and evangelization are still necessary!

[philly-d-kidder]

Yes Arthur I agree..