Missouri Right to Life, one of the most powerful lobbying groups in Jefferson City, declared war this week on Gov. Matt Blunt's college building plan.
The anti-abortion organization, which has found new momentum in the fight to block research on early stem cells, sent a letter to lawmakers Wednesday urging them to oppose the sale of assets by Missouri's college loan agency. The Missouri Higher Education Loan Authority, known as MoHELA, has already approved the transfer of $350 million to the state over the next several years.
Blunt wants the money to fund a building boom at state universities, mostly for new facilities for life sciences research. In its letter, Missouri Right to Life said it opposes that plan because such research could include efforts to clone human cells.
Missouri Right to Life, the Missouri Catholic Conference and other opponents of early stem cell research say cloned cells are a human being in a Petri dish. The removal of stem cells therefore kills a nascent human life, they say.
Some lawmakers have talked about adding restrictions at buildings constructed with the money in question. But Missouri Right to Life says such efforts are preempted by Amendment 2, the initiative that Missouri voters approved in November to protect stem cell research.
"The proceeds of the sale (of the loan authority's assets) are earmarked to provide just the type of life-destructive funding that the cloners have been seeking from state government for seven years or more," the letter says. "Because of Amendment 2, there is no pro-life language that the legislature can add to any MoHELA proposal that will hold up in the courts."
The letter urges lawmakers to co-sponsor a proposal by two Republican lawmakers -- Sen. Matt Bartle of Lee's Summit and Rep. Jim Lembke of St. Louis County -- that would repeal Amendment 2 and impose a ban on the cloning of human cells.
"The number of lives that will be at risk if human cloning is ever perfected will dwarf the number of abortions that are performed annually in our state and country," the letter said.
Amendment 2 already bans attempts to implant cloned cells into a woman's uterus in an attempt to create a cloned baby.
Posted by Kit Wagar
3000 soldiers dead falls to the hands of these deranged hypocrites. Life is the 'straw man' which drives this unhealthy guilt-trip about sex. Sexual abstinence is the real issue underlying this phony 'love of life.'
Posted by: Ed Friedemann | January 05, 2007 at 09:53 PM
This is insanity. Put Matt Bartle and Jim Lempke in straight jackets and let them legislate from their very own psych ward.
From that pulpit they can pontificate all they want to the crazies at the Missouri Right to Life.
Posted by: political moderate | January 05, 2007 at 10:00 PM
MoRTL is figuring our which interests the Missouri GOP is gonna put first. And it's not their interests.
And there's a lot of things MoRTL is gonna be able to do about that. They can't defeat Blunt in a primary and they'll be stuck in his corner against Nixon.
It says a lot that MoRTL has a dimmer political future right now than Mr. 35%. But they will get to claim that Blunt lost due to "not being conservative enough", while ignoring that Blunt has been dead in the water politically for the last 20 months (Blunt's job approval was below 40% in 18 of 20 SurveyUSA polls)
Maybe these guys should speak out against advances in electricity too.
After all, if any advances happen in electricity, then it'll be easier to research embryonic stem cells.
Also, they should oppose road repairs. Because if the roads are nicer, then it'll be easier for embryonic stem cell researchers to get to their dark labs to unleash their plans.
Posted by: | January 05, 2007 at 10:37 PM
Stem cell research should be legal and people that oppose it are likely well-intentioned but misguided. But given that, we shouldn't be using the proceeds of the MOHELA sale to finance the research. The purpose of MOHELA was to facilitate low cost loans and schloarships for students. I looked up the information at the Missouri Cures.com pro-stem cell website. When they asked us to vote for the stem cell amendment they said that Amendment 2 does not "require state funding for any type of stem cell research." This statement now seems to be at a minimum misleading. And there was proabably a reason the stem cell people spent $30 million to get the thing passed. Hell is likely to be freezing over at this point but for the first time in my life I think I actually agree with Missouri Right to Life.
Posted by: Russell | January 05, 2007 at 11:24 PM
How ignorant do you have to be to believe "cloned cells are a human being in a Petri dish"??
Knock knock, anyone home? Listen carefully (or read slowly): A human being is made up of literally BILLIONS of cells. A petri dish, on the other hand contains ONE cell.
That cell in the petri dish is NOT A BABY!! It will NEVER BE a baby. It must be implanted in a womb and grow into a baby. A petri dish is NOT a womb.
No one wants to clone Matt Bartle. Will someone please tell him that?
Posted by: | January 05, 2007 at 11:32 PM
The biomedical research industry spent $30 million to get this passed because it is vital for them to continue their work here in KC. Without stem cell research, they will die. KC will be abandoned by the biomedical research community. Stowers has already built another facility in Massachusetts. They will move there and leave a big gap in our local economy if stem cell research is banned. No they are not counting on any govt money to fund their research. They just want to survive.
Posted by: | January 05, 2007 at 11:37 PM
Kit- Do you call NARAL an anti-life group?
Posted by: Becky | January 05, 2007 at 11:49 PM
I was going to jump in this debate as a pro lifer, but I think I will reiterate my other problem with amendment 2. It gives research facilities a carte blanche. I listened to an attorney speak the other day who was explaining that the cloning theory aside the wording prevented the state and municipalities from interfering in any way with the research facility, this includes zoning regulations, etc.
I do believe in adult stem cell research. And even if I was not pro life I would have problems with amendment 2 because of the blanket freedoms it gives the research facilities. Do not kid yourself that the Stowers paid that much money just to keep the research alive, they stand to gain billions from this.
But the voters have spoken and while I think we will regret the decision, it is the way it is.
But the next few years will tell the story....if I am wrong and we suddenly have cures and an huge economic boom in MO I will admit that I was wrong...but again, wait and see and then we'll know...
Posted by: southerngirl | January 06, 2007 at 12:30 AM
If they aren't counting on any money then why are they going after the MOHELA proceeds. I completely support the research and think it should be legal but I don't believe that MOHELA proceeds should be used to subsidize it. And I think the vast majority of people that voted for Amendment 2 would agree with me.
Posted by: Russell | January 06, 2007 at 01:01 AM
I still say that to put an anti-stem cell issue on the 2008 ballot will make for a very close and interesting Presidential electon in Missouri. Each time such issues appear, those of us who believe in scientific research and women's rights are reminded again of where the neoconservative Republicans stand.
Posted by: tinyjab | January 06, 2007 at 07:30 AM
My only comment is that I completely agree with Russel's posts.
Posted by: craig | January 06, 2007 at 07:50 AM
I don't understand. I thought this was settled in November. It was voted on and passed. All that aside, will anyone that voted against the stem cell ballot- clue me in on what they think will happen now? Do they believe there will be secret missouri cloning projects? Damn. The one thing that continues to get omitted from these posts is the fact that there is (and has been) FEDERAL LAW in place that supercedes any missouri constitutional concerns. Go home cry babies! It's over.
Posted by: stevemeszaros | January 06, 2007 at 08:12 AM
Steve,
My only problem is this; my understanding was that no tax dollars were to be used in this reasearch. It was supposed to be funded privately. I voted for it.
Posted by: craig | January 06, 2007 at 08:47 AM
If the concerns that Russel and craig have regarding MOHELA include the building of any structure using those funds, I'm okay with their position.
If the objection to the use of MOHELA funds is isolated to the fact that they will be used to build a Life Sciences building-then I disagree.
I am definitely opposed to ANY effort to challenge the people's decision regarding Amendment 2. Petty politicians like Bartle and Lembke have to figure out that thumbing their noses at the people is not acceptable.
Posted by: political moderate | January 06, 2007 at 08:50 AM
Voting for Amendment 2 will help save thousands of Missourians lives. Which is a better step to improve life than what MRL has done lately. How ridiculously ignorant the pro-death stance they have taken!!!
We've got people suffering and dying right here and now and MRL and anyone who follows them insists we do nothing to stop it.
Those people are sick and deserve to suffer just like every man, woman, and child who is sentenced to a wheelchair, sticks themselves with multiple needles per day, and sees a lifetime of memories vanish overnight.
It's easy to thump people over the head w/ religion. It's much tougher to put it to practice. I choose the latter.
Posted by: Patrick Pierce | January 06, 2007 at 09:23 AM
Ed, it may say something about your sex life that you associate it with white coats and petri dishes; I daresay that's not the typical set of experiences, in Missouri or elsewhere.
How ignorant do you need to be to believe that the number of cells in a human being are relevant to the moral status of that human being? More ignorant than most.
Patrick, unfortunately your side insists that some human beings are more important than others, but never offers a compelling argument outlining how we choose. See, e.g., the ignorant comment above suggesting that the number of cells is determinative. I'm sorry for failing to see how your vision, in which you happily sacrifice some human lives (though of course not your own) for others (possibly your own) is even plausibly more difficult to practice than one in which someone insists on not sacrificing other human lives even at the possible cost of their own. Don't pretend it's difficult to be selfish.
Posted by: Thomas | January 06, 2007 at 09:52 AM
Political moderate
We disagree a little.
I really don't like the MOHELA funds being used for anything but their intended purpose and on that I think we and most people would agree.
I also have some concerns the funds being used specifically for life science projects but mostly because we were told by the stem cell supporters that taxpayer funds wouldn't be used. If we would have been known in advance, I may have still have voted for Amendment 2 but it would be a closer issue. I don't feel great about the state subsidizing a particular industry but I know it happens quite often (proabably too often) and I know that stem cell is one of the more important ones.
Posted by: Russell | January 06, 2007 at 10:04 AM
Thomas, human lives are NOT being sacrificed. The blastocysts used for stem cell research are discarded by the donors. These cells will NEVER be babies or human life. If they are not used for research, they are thrown away.
Now which is really pro-life: using these cells to find cures for diseases or throwing them away?
Posted by: | January 06, 2007 at 10:39 AM
It looks to me like the Republicans need to learn how to eat their own (i.e. Bartle and Lembke). Those two are out of step with everyone.
Posted by: Joel Lackey | January 06, 2007 at 11:06 AM
Russell, I am absolutely not a Blunt fan...but I'm curious. If he is hell-bent on using MOHELA to fund building at Mizzou, is it not possible that Life Sciences is the most most critical need?
Is it not possible that MoRTL is merely trying to politicize and give their agenda traction by trying to make a connection between stem cell research and the building of this facility?
Maybe I have on my ruby colored glasses, but I think the stink over this whole thing is coming from the MoRTL people...not Blunt.
They are without conscience in their effort to fight Amendment 2.
Blunt, who hasn't got a lick of political sense, gave them the excuse they needed to exploit this whole thing.
Posted by: political moderate | January 06, 2007 at 11:19 AM
Thomas must think that a woman's monthly cycle is abortion too. Should every female on the planet be in jail as a result of natural occurrence? Every male should be in prison due to ejaculation too, b/c that's killing a living breathing being right???
There are NO sides on the stem cell issue. You either A. Have common sense or B. Have ABSOLUTELY NO common sense.
It's really that simple of an issue. It's not political, it's not religious, it's a people issue.
Do you want to help ALL people or not?
If not, then I pity you and the rest of the Matt Bartles of the world.
Posted by: Patrick Pierce | January 06, 2007 at 11:52 AM
Actually, Patrick, according to the anti-stem cell logic, menstruation would be manslaughter and masturbation is definitely mass murder.
Posted by: | January 06, 2007 at 11:59 AM
Political moderate,
I agree with you on Blunt. I think he is a disaster for a number of reasons including the health care cuts, political cronyism, first steps, hab center in St. Louis, Randa Hayes, remodeling his office and being dishonest about it, MOHELA, and a bunch of things. He is a worse Governor than Holden and that says a lot.
I think you agree with me on the lack of wisdom in selling off MOHELA's assets.
I think life science is probably a critical need. The research should be legally protected. I just don't know whether the state should subsidize it.
I do think this thing is coming from MRL not Blunt but as crazy as they are I happen to think they make a little sense here when they point out that the MOHELA money shouldn't go to stem cell research. And I also agree with them that the sale shouldn't happen. You do make some good points and agreeing with MRL to any extent causes me grief.
Posted by: Russell | January 06, 2007 at 12:34 PM
The best solution to this question is to go back to the drawing boards on MOHELA.
If we take that out of the equation, the rest goes away (for now).
Posted by: political moderate | January 06, 2007 at 12:59 PM
anon poster at 10:39, you apparently sat out the Amendment 2 debate, didn't you? The whole point of Amendment 2 was to constitutionally protect the creation and subsequent destruction for research purposes of human embryos by cloning. The "leftover" line is several years out of date. You need to update your talking points.
Patrick, do you really believe there's no difference between an unfertilized egg or a sperm cell and a human embryo? Here's one difference: you were never an egg cell, or a sperm cell, but you were once an embryo. For such a moron, you sure spout a lot of bluster.
Posted by: Thomas | January 06, 2007 at 07:47 PM