As expected President Obama signed an executive disorder to allow federal funding of embryonic stem-cell research.

But in recent years, when it comes to stem cell research, rather than furthering discovery, our government has forced what I believe is a false choice between sound science and moral values. In this case, I believe the two are not inconsistent. As a person of faith, I believe we are called to care for each other and work to ease human suffering. I believe we have been given the capacity and will to pursue this research – and the humanity and conscience to do so responsibly.

Of course the truth was that unfortunately the private sector could do all of the embryonic stem-call research they wanted. The only change is now taxpayers are being forced to be part of this evil.

It is a difficult and delicate balance. Many thoughtful and decent people are conflicted about, or strongly oppose, this research. I understand their concerns, and we must respect their point of view.

This is the tactic the President always uses. Just like a previous statement “understands that abortion is a divisive issue, and respects those who disagree with him. “Hey I understand and respect your viewpoint, but I am going to do it anyway.”

…I can also promise that we will never undertake this research lightly. We will support it only when it is both scientifically worthy and responsibly conducted. We will develop strict guidelines, which we will rigorously enforce, because we cannot ever tolerate misuse or abuse. And we will ensure that our government never opens the door to the use of cloning for human reproduction. It is dangerous, profoundly wrong, and has no place in our society, or any society.

Isn’t murder a “misuse and abuse.” The bit about cloning is a sleight of hand and you might wonder why he includes it in talking about embryonic stem-call research. Just like all the liars from the culture of death they define cloning as creating a clone that is actually allowed to live. They call this reproductive cloning. But so-called therapeutic cloning (clone and kill) will be totally allowed. Had to laugh at the “I can promise you” considering that he has broken campaign promises on a record pace. His only true promises unfortunately are where he promised to do evil.

If you follow embryonic stem-call research you find that the majority of the research is in clone and kill and not using human beings created via IVF. As I have mentioned before embryonic stem-cells have major immune system problems, that is why adult stem-cell research actually has lead to cures since they are using their own stem-cells. So using frozen human embryos will remain a non-starter unless the immune system problems are solved. Though that won’t stop scientist from continuing the slaughter of human persons by experimenting with their embryos. But of course for all of this rhetoric must be used to disguise the truth. If human cloning became possible than you could have a clone of you taken and then killed for the stem-cells. Cannibalizing your twin is such an appealing idea.

But after much discussion, debate and reflection, the proper course has become clear. The majority of Americans – from across the political spectrum, and of all backgrounds and beliefs – have come to a consensus that we should pursue this research. That the potential it offers is great, and with proper guidelines and strict oversight, the perils can be avoided.

True that many on both sides of the political spectrum are willing to overlook the dignity of the human person for potential cures. Sen. McCain an many other republicans saw no problem with so-called leftover embryos – but drew the line at cloning. An incoherent moral argument – “they are going to die anyway.” Well I got news for you – the same thing goes for all of us.

This Order is an important step in advancing the cause of science in America. But let’s be clear: promoting science isn’t just about providing resources – it is also about protecting free and open inquiry. It is about letting scientists like those here today do their jobs, free from manipulation or coercion, and listening to what they tell us, even when it’s inconvenient – especially when it’s inconvenient. It is about ensuring that scientific data is never distorted or concealed to serve a political agenda – and that we make scientific decisions based on facts, not ideology.

Pure scientism. No mention that science must be guided by morality. The above paragraph would have suited Josef Mengel just fine.

The President ends by bringing up Christopher Reeve’s once again. Reminds me of Sen. Edwards despicable comment the day after Reeve’s died “people like Christopher Reeve are going to walk again.” The new traveling medical show provides the same old con. Though at least before people only walked away conned, those killed in research can’t walk away.

Fr. Reese S.J. tries to sound reasonable about the destruction of human beings for research and offers some proposed restrictions.

1. Embryos for research cannot be bought and sold. Embryos should not be created for the sole purpose of research. They should only come from excess embryos produced at fertility clinics that are scheduled to be destroyed anyway.

2. Before using human embryonic stem cells, researchers should show that the research they are doing cannot be done with non-embryonic stem cells.

3. Research using embryonic stem cells should aim at advancing toward the goal of using only non-embryonic stem cells in regenerative medicine. In other words, once the process of developing adult stem cells for treatments has been shown to be safe and reliable, any research in embryonic stem cells should be able to move seamlessly into the use of adult stem cells leaving the ethical problems behind.

These rules will not satisfy those who find any use of embryos ethically objectionable, but it will indicate that the Obama administration is trying to find some middle ground that gives some respect to the many Americans who find such research repugnant. In short, if science shows a way out of this ethical dilemma, we should follow it.

The way he writes reminds me exactly of his time as America Magazine editor. Where both sides of “an issue” were presented where one side is the teaching of the Church. He writes like he has no dog in the fight, as a distant observer. That the discussion the murder of innocent human beings for the purpose of research is like discussion which type of soda you prefer. It is also rather silly to expect science to show us a way out of the “ethical dilemma.” We can’t just let innocents be murdered while scientists figure this out. Moral guidance needs to be given to those who get caught up in research and not the morality of what they are doing. For Fr. Reese I guess you can do evil for some good as long as you suggest some restrictions along the way.

It is rather silly for Fr. Reese to even suggest restrictions to President Obama who voted for infanticide rather than having even the remotest threat against Roe v. Wade.

Ed Peters weighs in about the Fallacy of the Mean and goes on to say:

Some Founding Fathers thought slavery should be protected throughout the country, others thought it should be made illegal everywhere. So they compromised, and made half the States slave, half free. We all know how that one turned out, don’t we?

I believe that no embryonic human being should be experimented upon, let alone killed. The Obama administration believes that they all can be treated so. Reese suggests we settle our differences by only experimenting on and killing “the extra ones”. How one squares Reese’s compromise with the absolute prohibition against deliberately taking an innocent human life (Evangelium vitae, 57) I have no idea.

And yes, I know they’re (almost certainly) “going to die anyway”, and not like you or I are “going to die anyway.” But that does not mean that these tiny people should die by my hand, or with my dollars.

As we look for a way out of Complication No. 658 that follows in the wake of separating sex from procreation, we’re going to need better options than ‘just-kill-some-of-them’.

Really quite a powerful ad from Preists for Life which I saw was even in rotation on the Drudge Report.

In other pro-life news

CHERRY HILL, New Jersey, March 7, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) – A lone sidewalk counselor at a Cherry Hill abortion center is suffering from horrifying injuries after a young man driving his pregnant wife to the abortuary reportedly struck the elderly counselor and ran him over. But the victim’s wife says that the event probably saved a life, as she believes she was able to persuade the man afterwards not to abort his child. [reference]

Both of these stories found via Big Blue Wave.

Archbishop Joseph F. Naumann writes a thoughtful column on the appointment of Gov. Sebeilus as Secretary of HHS. He goes through his concerns about her record and what this will mean for the country and for her soul. After he goes through the history he writes this:

I am also concerned personally for Governor Sebelius. Her appointment as Secretary for HHS places her in a position where she will have to make many decisions that will in all probability continue her personal involvement in promoting legalized abortion and her cooperation in this intrinsic evil.

I am also concerned that the appointment of Governor Sebelius places another Catholic supporting legalized abortion in a prominent national position. She joins Vice-President Joe Biden, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and unfortunately a host of Catholic Senators and members of the House of Representatives who support legalized abortion contrary to the clear and consistent teaching of their Church. It saddens me that so many Catholics, to gain political advancement, have chosen to compromise their Catholic faith by their failure to defend the most fundamental of all human rights – the right to life.

I am reminded of the powerful scene in A Man for All Seasons, the play about the heroic Catholic English Martyr, St. Thomas More. After Richard Rich has perjured himself in order to make it possible to convict Thomas More of treason, the Judge asks Thomas More if he has any questions for the witness. Thomas More notes that Richard Rich is wearing a chain of office and asks what it signifies. He is told that Richard Rich has been appointed Attorney General for Wales. Thomas More then paraphrases the Gospel saying to Richard Rich: “What does it profit a man to gain the whole world and lose his soul, but for Wales?”

We need to pray for all Catholics who serve in public life that they will have the courage and integrity to be true to the teachings and principles of our Faith no matter the political consequences.

Valerie Schmalz at OSV Daily Take also interviews the bishop about this.