Weekly News

March 29, 2007 – Today a new website was launched which will be used to educate about, and advocate for, Christian government. Visit us at www.christiangovernment.ca.

Initially the purpose of this website is to help sell the provocative new must-read book for social conservatives, “State vs. Church: What Christians Can Do to Save Canada from Liberal Tyranny.”

You can read the introduction of the book as well as the endorsements for the book on our website.

Please note that the regular price for the book is listed on the website, but due to publication delays, our pre-publication discount offer will now remain in effect through to April 7. If you haven’t taken advantage of this offer yet, I encourage you to do so. Remember there is a full 100% money-back guarantee if you are not satisfied with the book for any reason.

The pre-publication discounted prices for the book are $18 (plus $3 S&H) for the paperback and $22 (plus $4 S&H) for the hardcover.

But, since we have the website set up now for the regular price, in order to benefit from the sale price, I need to ask you to pay by cheque or money order and to send your payment to us at:

I do hope you find the material that we are providing valuable. I look forward to hearing from you.

2. CLC News That Stem Cells Can Be Created Without Embryos But Expresses Caution – November 25, 2007

Campaign Life Coalition welcomes the news that stem cells can be created without embryos but expresses caution.

Canada's Christian Heritage Party and its leader, Ron Gray, are being taken to the Canadian Human Rights Commission over commentary and opinion related to how the government and society should treat homosexuality. And Gray says he's been told directly by an employee of the Human Rights Commission that the Canadian Human Rights Act is "about censorship".

Complaint centres in part on re-posting of 5-year old WorldNetDaily.com news article

An Edmonton man, Rob Wells, has filed three complaints against Gray and his party. Two of them relate to the reposting of an item first published on WorldNetDaily.com back in April of 2002; an article written by Jon Dougherty entitled " Report: Pedophilia more common among 'gays' - Research purports to reveal 'dark side' of homosexual culture". The third complaint is against Ron Gray personally for several commentaries he wrote and distributed to party members. One of those commentaries, entitled " Sitcom prophet", likened the current climate of debate about homosexuality in Canada to the "Cone of Silence" in the 1960's-era television situation comedy " Get Smart", where the two leading characters would isolate themselves in a room where no-one could hear them, but they couldn't hear one another either. Gray wrote in the commentary that: "The problem with Canada's 'Cone of Silence' over the issue of homosexuality is that, like the security device in 'Get Smart', the inevitable result is that no one can communicate anything - and even the truth gets silenced."

In an exclusive interview with noapologies.ca, Ron Gray says the complaints filed against him and his party allege they are "motivated by hate, and defaming homosexual persons."

Ron Gray: "Commission employee told me: 'Canadian Human Rights Act is about censorship.'"

And, he says, when he had a conversation with a Commission employee, mediator Bob Fagan, about the specifics of the allegation, he was astonished at what he heard. "I told him that it seemed to be an abuse of the Human Rights Act for someone to try and use it as an instrument of censorship. And when I said that, on the phone, there was a pause and then he said, in a somewhat astonished tone: 'But the Human Rights Act is about censorship'. Then it was my turn to be silent on my end, because I found that breath-taking. For the Human Rights Commission's own mediator to acknowledge that censorship was the purpose of their Act."

Gray: "Charge me under the Criminal Code; I'm perfectly willing to risk going to jail. "

And Gray says as far as the "hate motivation" is concerned, nothing could be further from the truth. "I would contend", he says, "that Christians are the best friends homosexuals have because we want to see them delivered from an addiction that will shorten their lives." Gray also says he'd be much happier fighting this battle in a regular court rather than before the Canadian Human Rights Commission, where the usual rules of evidence don't apply. "If (Mr. Wells) truly believes I am motivated by hate, his complaint should not be before the Human Rights Commission. He should charge me under Section 319 of the Criminal Code (of Canada). That carries with is the possibility of two years in jail, but in defence of the (free speech) rights of Canadians I am perfectly willing to risk going to jail."

We'll have the full interview with Ron Gray on our "week in review" program this weekend.

A majority of high school seniors — 82 percent of girls and 70 percent of boys — say a good marriage is extremely important to them. Yet the number of marriages in America is down, while the number of cohabiting couples is skyrocketing. What's happening here?

Glenn Stanton, director of global family formation studies at Focus on the Family, explains that, in an odd way, this all makes sense.

"Young people deeply desire happy marriages and families in their adult years," he said, "but they are more likely to cohabit for two reasons: One as a placeholder relationship until they meet that someone who could be their spouse. The second is they are scared to death of failing at marriage like so many of their boomer parents did."

Stanton, who compiled years of research in a new report, Family Formation Trends and Analysis, said fear on the part of young people should be softened by the fact that "at no time in our nation's history have we possessed better information and resources on how to make marriages work than we have today."

"This can be a God-ordained opportunity for our churches to realize this unfortunate gap between what young people desire and what they think they can achieve and become marriage-strengthening centers in our communities.

"Young people have this idea that you can find your soul mate, rather than two people becoming soul mates through many years together of highs and lows," Stanton said. "Marriage is a great life, but it is hard work and there are days when spouses would rather throw in the towel. Our marriage vows anticipate days like this and therefore include the good and the bad. But an overly romantic view only sees marriage as a long, wonderful date. Anyone with that view is bound to be disappointed."

Stanton reports the American divorce rate has nearly doubled since 1960. And between 1970 and 2004, the annual number of U.S. weddings has dropped nearly 50 percent.

David Popenoe and Barbara Whitehead break down the statistics in their 2006 State of Our Unions report:

"If you are a reasonably well-educated person with a decent income, come from an intact family and are religious, and marry after age twenty-five without having a child first, your chances of divorce are very low indeed," they write in their 2006 report.

Bulgaria Abortion Rate High: Bulgaria reports nearly 67,000 abortions done annually. In recent years, it has been reporting approximately one baby killed in an abortion for every one delivered.

Mexico, Court To Review New Law: The Mexico Supreme Court on May 28 accepted a petition to review the constitutionality of the new Mexico City law legalizing abortion. The petition states, "That the law violates the constitution which guarantees the right to life and that the Mexico City legislators did not have the authority to approve such a law." The vote of eight of the court's eleven justices is required to overturn the law.

New Source Of Pluripotent Stem Cells: In the June 7 edition of the journals, Nature and Stem Cells, Japanese researchers report having produced embryo-like pluripotent stem cells from the skin cells of mice. They introduced four proteins, which "re-programmed" the cell's nuclear DNA. These produced stem cells equal to embryonic stem cells. If this is reproducible, this may signal the final death knell to the continued push to kill human embryos to get embryonic stem cells. – Jerry Novotny, OMI

Thought: "There are just choices and there are unjust choices. Choices would be the preference for chocolate ice cream over vanilla ice cream or sherbet instead of ice cream. That is just a choice. A just choice would be to choose to pay a fair and living wage to employees as opposed to simply meeting the mandatory standard of minimum wage laws. An unjust choice would be to choose to terminate the life of another human being. This is not just a choice and it is not a just choice; it is an unjust choice. Furthermore it is an unjust choice, which is diametrically opposed to the clear and consistent teaching of the Catholic Church as well as to the clear and consistent teaching of God Himself in the Ten Commandments. The direct, intentional taking of the life of an innocent human being is inhumane and unjust. It is not just a choice!" – Bishop Robert Vasa, Diocese of Baker, Oregon, March 1, 2007

Table Of Contents:
1. New Study Claims Abstinence Education Ineffective, Contradicts Research
2. Pro-Life Organizer Of "40 Days Of Life" Says Focus On Abortion Won't Stop
3. Swiss Suicide Group Operates In Car Parks
4. Return To Natural Family Planning
5. If The Test Says Down Syndrome
6. Cardinal Says Catholic Support For Pro-Abortion Democrats "Scandalous"
7. Christmas Insanity: 'Ho, Ho, Ho' Becomes 'Ha, Ha, Ha'
8. Monkey Embryos Cloned For Stem Cells
9. Friday Five: Dawn Eden (In The Casual-Sex Culture, Abstinence Is A Message That Desperately Needs To Be Heard.)
10. Court Clears Way For Egg Rights Showdown
11. Mum Gives Birth To Quintuplets
12. The Ten Great Myths In The Debate Over Stem Cell Research

Focus On Asia: Bangladesh cyclone kills hundreds –
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7097678.stm – At least 600 people are reported to have died after a powerful cyclone smashed into Bangladesh's coast, levelling villages and uprooting trees.

Item #1. New Study Claims Abstinence Education Ineffective, Contradicts Research
A new study claims that abstinence education is ineffective in modifying the behaviours of teenagers and getting them to have less sex less often. However, the study, which only examined a couple dozen programs, contradicts previous research showing abstinence education has proven results.

Item #2. Pro-Life Organizer Of "40 Days Of Life" Says Focus On Abortion Won't Stop
The official "40 Days of Life" nationwide campaign of prayer at abortion businesses across America may be over, but the organizer of the event says the focus against abortion won't stop. The event is credited with helping re-organize pro-life groups on the local level and starting new ones to stand up for women and children.

Item #3. Swiss Suicide Group Operates In Car Parks
A controversial Swiss suicide charity is now helping people to die in car parks after being forced out of its premises by local residents.

Item #4. Return To Natural Family Planning
To those who claim that access to birth control has given women freedom to make larger contributions to society, I have three things to say:

Item #5. If The Test Says Down Syndrome
All across the land this fall, people have been gathering to promote awareness and acceptance of Down syndrome. Central to their message is the idea that people with the condition are valued family members who lead happy, fulfilling lives.

Item #6. Cardinal Says Catholic Support For Pro-Abortion Democrats "Scandalous"
A leading Catholic cardinal says Catholic voters who continue to support the Democratic Party despite its pro-abortion stance are doing the Church a disservice. He says the party has been openly hostile to pro-life advocates and Catholic support for pro-abortion Democratic candidates "borders on scandal."

Cardinal Sean O'Malley of Boston says he has policy differences with the Republican Party but he is more concerned about the Democratic Party because abortion is an overriding issue more important than others.

O'Malley, the head of the Boston archdiocese, made the statements to the Boston Globe in an interview published Thursday. "I think the Democratic Party, which has been in many parts of the country traditionally the party which Catholics have supported, has been extremely insensitive to the church's position, on the gospel of life in particular, and on other moral issues," O'Malley said.

Item #7. Christmas Insanity: 'Ho, Ho, Ho' Becomes 'Ha, Ha, Ha'
When kids hear Santa Claus bellow, "Ho, ho, ho," is their first thought prostitution? That concern has prompted an attempt to gag the traditional greeting, and many Santas are now fighting back.

According to the Sydney Daily Telegraph, Santas across Australia are rebelling against attempts to change their saying to a more politically correct, "ha, ha, ha." It all started when the recruitment firm Westaff – which has offices both in the United States and Australia – told its Christmas trainees that the "ho, ho, ho" phrase could frighten children and possibly be derogatory to women.

Item #8. Monkey Embryos Cloned For Stem Cells
Researchers in Oregon reported yesterday that they had created the world's first fully formed, cloned monkey embryos and harvested batches of stem cells from them – a feat that, if replicated in people, could allow production of replacement tissues or organs with no risk of rejection.

Successful creation of the cloned embryos, each from a single monkey skin cell, effectively settles a long-standing scientific debate about whether primates – the taxonomic grouping that includes monkeys and people – are biologically incapable of being cloned, as some had come to believe after years of failures.

That fact alone could reinvigorate a stalled congressional battle over whether restrictions on human embryo cloning should be tightened or loosened. Currently, such work is legal with private funds but off-limits to federally funded scientists.

Item #9. Friday Five: Dawn Eden (In The Casual-Sex Culture, Abstinence Is A Message That Desperately Needs To Be Heard.)
College campuses across the country are reporting rising numbers of sexual assaults, date rapes and sexually transmitted infections (STIs). There is also evidence that the "hook-up culture" on campuses – casual sexual activity with no strings attached – is affecting students' mental health. Federal health officials released a report this week showing that the U.S. last year hit a record high of more than 1 million cases of Chlamydia – a record.

On Tuesday, the Ethics and Public Policy Center and the Cardinal Newman Society hosted a conference, "Modest Proposals," to address the sexual climate, specifically on college campuses. It featured a panel of chastity all-stars who have written books that address the problem of sex on campus and seek solutions beyond more condoms and more STI testing.

Item #10. Court Clears Way For Egg Rights Showdown
More than a third of surgeons surveyed reported giving drugs with an intention to hasten death, often in the absence of an explicit request. However, in many instances, this may involve the use of an infusion of analgesics or sedatives, and such actions may be difficult to distinguish from accepted palliative care, except on the basis of the doctor's self-reported intention. Legal and moral distinctions based solely on a doctor's intention are problematic.

Item #11. Mum Gives Birth To Quintuplets
Quintuplets born to a Russian woman in a British hospital are doing well. The babies were delivered at 26 weeks by caesarean section by Dr Lawrence Impey of the John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford. He was contacted by the mother's relatives after her doctor in Russia had advised selective abortion for some of the babies. All medical costs have been met by a group of Russian philanthropists.

Item #12. The Ten Great Myths In The Debate Over Stem Cell Research
1. Stem cells can only come from embryos. In fact stem cells can be taken from umbilical cords, the placenta, amniotic fluid, adult tissues and organs such as bone marrow, fat from liposuction, regions of the nose, and even from cadavers up to 20 hours after death. (Read more)

Get Involved:
1. Be Informed: "My people are destroyed from lack of knowledge." Hosea 4:6. Go to Lifeissues.net: http://www.lifeissues.net.
2. Pray Daily: for the courage to be God's presence in society and strongly support those who are deemed "unworthy of life". "If My people who are called by My Name, will humble themselves and pray and seek My face and turn from their wicked ways, then will I hear from heaven and will forgive their sin and will heal their land." 2 Chronicles 7:14
3. Be Involved: "Journey for Life into the Heart of Asia" is a project, which appeals for donations to help finance travel expenses for talks to developing countries in Asia. Strong focus is placed on reaching Asian Catholic Major Seminaries, Schools and Family related groups. A series of lectures places emphasis on "The Asian Family at Crossroads: Trends and Challenges". For inquires about no-cost Pro Life Talks to your group within Asia: contact Fr. Jerry atjerry@star.quolia.com. To become a supportive Missionary participant for Human Life in Asia, kindly send your donations directly to: Fr. Jerry Novotny, OMI; LifeIssues.net, Editor; Akebono-cho 1-15-9; Kochi City, Japan, 780-8072; (or transfer donation directly to ProLife bank account: Jerome Novotny, Shikoku Bank, Asakura Branch, No. 102-1-0080824)

Contact Editor: Jerry Novotny, OMI; Akebono-cho 1-15-9; Kochi City, Japan, 780-8072; Tel/Fax: 088-843-0406; E-Mail: jerry@lifeissues.net

UNICEF is definitely Promoting Abortion. This UN Children's Fund, which persistently denies that it supports abortion in any way, is now on record supporting a new global initiative that calls for world wide legal abortion. As usual, this is marketed as a campaign to raise awareness on maternal and child health. The groups sponsoring this include WHO, UNFPA, IPPF, The Gates Foundation, and a variety of federal agencies, all of which are aggressively pro-abortion.

Dominican Republic, abortion and the country's future: There is a major move afoot to legalize abortion in the Caribbean nation of the Dominican Republic. In response to this, the local Catholic Church has initiated a large-scale offensive. Two hundred and sixty Catholic Churches will hold coordinated anti-abortion protests all on the same day. This will include signs on public sidewalks and thoroughfares. It will involve preaching in the churches. Further, a human chain will completely encircle the Capitol building and Catholics throughout the nation will turn their headlights on during the day to symbolize their protection for the unborn and rejection of abortion. It will conclude with a March for Life through the capital city, including singers, and other artists showing works of art, pro-life works, and performing. Pro-lifers have stated that if legalization occurs, the Dominican Republic will become the slaughterhouse of the Caribbean. We wish them well. – Jerry Novotny, OMI

P.S. Many thanks to Pro-Life Movement Thailand for hosting an excellent "14th Asia Pacific Congress on Love, Life and Family". The theme centered on "Interfaith Dialogue and Solidarity on the Value and Meaning of Life."

Thought: "The so-called right to abortion has pitted mothers against their children and women against men. It has sown violence and discord at the heart of the most intimate human relationships...It has portrayed the greatest of gifts – a child – as a competitor, an intrusion, and an inconvenience. It has nominally accorded mothers unfettered dominion over the independent lives of their physically dependent sons and daughters...The right to life does not depend, and must not be declared to be contingent, on the pleasure of anyone else, not even a parent or a sovereign." – Blessed Mother Teresa, 1994.

Table Of Contents:
1. Couples Win The Right To Use IVF To Create 'Spare Part Babies'
2. Court Clears Way For Egg Rights Showdown
3. Infirm Elderly Need Loving Support, Pope Says
4. Portugal Doctors Refuse Government Mandate To Promote Abortions
5. Christian Web Site's Poll Finds Most Christians Oppose Most Abortions
6. Changing Family Structure Puts Children At Risk
7. Is The Decline Of Marriage Inevitable?
8. Brazilian Government's National Health Conference Rejects Abortion
9. Huge Discovery Alters Stem Cell Research
10. What Is Genetic Testing?
11. Drug And Alcohol Abuse After Abortion
12. Responses To The US CCB On ANH With Accompanying Commentary

Focus On Asia: Rights – Sri Lanka: Civil War Brutality Hits New Lows – While Sri Lanka's minister for human rights Mahinda Samarasinghe has denied allegations by a top United Nations official that torture is ‘routine’ in the country, there is little doubt that the renewed civil war has resulted in brutality hitting new lows. http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=39879

Item #1. Couples Win The Right To Use IVF To Create 'Spare Part Babies'
Parents of sick children will be allowed to use IVF to create "spare part babies" under controversial laws published yesterday. The legislation will dramatically relax rules on IVF clinics creating "saviour siblings" - who can help cure their older brothers and sisters of medical conditions such as leukaemia. Experts said that one day they could create a "designer baby" with kidneys, which are perfectly compatible with a sibling suffering renal failure.

Item #2. Court Clears Way For Egg Rights Showdown
The Colorado Supreme Court cleared the way Tuesday for an anti-abortion group to collect signatures for a ballot measure that would define a fertilized egg as a person. The court approved the language of the proposal, rejecting a challenge from abortion-rights supporters who argued it was misleading and dealt with more than one subject in violation of the state constitution. If approved by voters, the measure would give fertilized eggs the state constitutional protections of inalienable rights, justice and due process.

Item #3. Infirm Elderly Need Loving Support, Pope Says
The elderly and infirm "need to be helped to follow the last stage of their earthly lives consciously and humanly, to prepare themselves serenely for death which – we Christians know – is the passage to the embrace of the heavenly Father, full of tenderness and mercy," the Pope said. Those who are suffering terminal illness, he continued, need "understanding, comfort, and constant encouragement and accompaniment."

Item #4. Portugal Doctors Refuse Government Mandate To Promote Abortions
Doctors in Portugal are refusing to comply with a governmental mandate that they remove from their national organization's bylaws a provision saying it's wrong to do an abortion. The government of this western European nation legalized abortion in January and has seen numerous physicians decline to do them.

Item #5. Christian Web Site's Poll Finds Most Christians Oppose Most Abortions
One of the largest Christian web sites on the Internet has released the results of a poll it conducted among its forum members. The ChristiaNet.com poll finds virtually all Christians oppose abortions, with all but a handful saying they oppose all or almost all abortions.

Item #6. Changing Family Structure Puts Children At Risk
A growing number of children are living in homes that are not conducive to their overall health and welfare, according to Glenn Stanton, director of global family formation studies at Focus on the Family. "We find more and more kids being raised in homes that are unfortunately not suited to the well-being of children, but addressing and fitting the whims of adults, like cohabiting homes and single-parent homes," he told Family News in Focus.

Item #7. Is The Decline Of Marriage Inevitable?
A majority of high school seniors – 82 percent of girls and 70 percent of boys – say a good marriage is extremely important to them. Yet the number of marriages in America is down, while the number of cohabiting couples is skyrocketing. What's happening here?

Item #8. Brazilian Government's National Health Conference Rejects Abortion
The Brazilian National Health Conference, an arm of the pro-abortion Ministry of Health of the socialist Lula regime, has made headlines across the nation by roundly rejecting the legalization of abortion. "The Ministry of Health was defeated", summed up the Globe, a nationally recognized newspaper, which attributed the event to the superior organization of Catholic delegates to the conference. According to Francisco Batista Junior, president of the National Health Council, at least 70% of the participants voted against the proposal, even after it had been watered down with vague language. The word "abortion" had been removed from the original text, and replaced with the term "reproductive rights", a phrase often used by the abortion lobby to refer to the availability of abortion.

Item #9. Huge Discovery Alters Stem Cell Research
Australia is moving away from controversial therapeutic cloning on the back of major international stem cell work that could bypass the need for embryos to be destroyed. Two separate teams of researchers from the United States and Japan have announced they have re-programmed skin cells into cells that mimic embryonic stem cells. The breakthrough could make possible the long-sought goal of using human cells to fight disease, without the political, scientific and ethical implications of using human embryos. The Catholic Church has welcomed the development as a saviour of human life, saying, "people of all religions and none will be rejoicing that human embryo destruction is no longer scientifically warranted".

Item #10. What Is Genetic Testing?
Genetic testing is the testing of a person's DNA. Genetic testing is done for many reasons, including to establish paternity, diagnose disease, determine sex, or determine tissue type. Scientists perform genetic testing on adults, children, foetuses, and, more recently, embryos in the very early stages of development.

Item #11. Drug And Alcohol Abuse After Abortion
Studies show that women who have had abortions have a higher rate of drug and alcohol abuse compared to women who have not had abortions. Even more troubling is an increased rate of drug and alcohol abuse during pregnancy. Research also shows the drug and alcohol abuse occurs abuse occurs after abortion rather than before the abortion.

Item #12. Responses To The US CCB On ANH With Accompanying Commentary
The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith has formulated responses to questions presented by His Excellency The Most Reverend William S. Skylstad, President of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, in a letter of July 11, 2005, regarding the nutrition and hydration of patients in the condition commonly called a "vegetative state." The object of the questions was whether the nutrition and hydration of such patients, especially if provided by artificial means, would constitute an excessively heavy burden for the patients, for their relatives, or for the health care system, to the point where it could be considered, also in the light of the moral teaching of the Church, a means that is extraordinary or disproportionate and therefore not morally obligatory.

Get Involved:
1. Be Informed: "My people are destroyed from lack of knowledge." Hosea 4:6. Visit Lifeissues.net for information at http://www.lifeissues.net .
2. Pray Daily: for the courage to be God's presence in society and strongly support those who are deemed "unworthy of life". "If My people who are called by My Name, will humble themselves and pray and seek My face and turn from their wicked ways, then will I hear from heaven and will forgive their sin and will heal their land." 2 Chronicles 7:14
3. Become Involved: "Journey for Life into the Heart of Asia" is a project, which appeals for donations to help finance travel expenses for talks to developing countries in Asia. Strong focus is placed on reaching Asian Catholic Major Seminaries, Schools, Parishes, Hospitals and Family related groups. A series of Life Issues lectures places emphasis on "The Asian Family at Crossroads: Trends and Challenges". For inquires about no-cost Pro Life Talks to your group within Asia: contact Fr. Jerry at jerry@star.quolia.com . To become a supportive Missionary participant for Human Life in Asia, kindly send your donations directly to: Fr. Jerry Novotny, OMI; LifeIssues.net, Editor; Akebono-cho 1-15-9; Kochi City, Japan, 780-8072; (or transfer donation directly to ProLife bank account: Jerome Novotny, Shikoku Bank, Asakura Branch, No. 102-1-0080824)

Contact Editor: Jerry Novotny, OMI; Akebono-cho 1-15-9; Kochi City, Japan, 780-8072; Tel/Fax: 088-843-0406; E-Mail:jerry@lifeissues.net

7. Margaret Somerville – Defending Fetal Homicide Laws – November 22, 2007

National Post – Full Comment – November 22, 2007

Joyce Arthur’s recent column, “Fetal homicide laws are not the answer” (in response to mine of Nov. 6) might be good advocacy and politics, but it’s bad law. It’s one more example of the erroneous rhetoric that pro-choice abortion advocates are using to promote their cause. Currently, one of their major concerns, as Ms. Arthur’s article shows, is to prevent any legal recognition of a fetus.

First, Ms. Athur is wrong that “creating a ‘fetal homicide’ law that would allow murder charges to be laid for the death of a fetus would be an unconstitutional infringement on women’s rights.” This is yet another version of the myth being propagated by pro-choice advocates that any law that would protect fetuses or punish those harming them is unconstitutional. Some of these people are respected legal academics, so it’s surprising that they are willing to publish erroneous views, for instance, as happened in a recent editorial in the Canadian Medical Association Journal, and suffer the criticism of their legal scholarship that ensues.

I am assuming that Ms. Arthur, like them, bases her mistaken claim on the Supreme Court of Canada’s ruling in the Morgentaler case. In striking down the provision in the Criminal Code governing abortion as unconstitutional, the Supreme Court made it clear, however, that Parliament could enact law to govern abortion provided it complied with the requirements of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

The problem with the abortion provision, as it stood, was its requirement that all abortions be approved by a therapeutic abortion committee before they could be legally carried out. The Court reasoned that if a woman whose pregnancy placed her life or health in danger could not access a therapeutic abortion committee, then she would not have access to a legal abortion. That potential lack of access was an infringement of a woman’s rights under section 7 of the Canadian Charter “to life … and security of the person”.

Puzzlingly, Ms. Arthur proposes we must choose between laws against domestic violence and establishing criminal offences for killing a fetus. But these laws are not incompatible, indeed, they are complementary; we can have both.

Ms. Arthur characterizes rights of the fetus as “theoretical”, as though they are necessarily a fantasy, and that “Canadian women have guaranteed rights and equality, while fetuses do not”. She’s correct; fetuses currently have no rights. But that is only because we have chosen not to confer them; there is no legal reason that we cannot do so, provided any law does not contravene the Charter. The question is, should we? In deciding, it’s relevant to note that Canada is unique among comparable countries in having no abortion law, that is, in treating all fetuses at all gestational ages, as having no legal rights or protections.

Ms. Arthur also relies on the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in Dobson to support her conclusions that the fetus does not exist for the law and no law should recognize or protect it, in particular, through an Unborn Victims of Violence Act. Again she is wrong. The two dissenting judges in Dobson would have recognized legal rights of the fetus to sue its mother for damages for injury inflicted in a motor vehicle accident by the mother’s negligent driving. The majority of the Court held that “a legal duty of care cannot and should not be imposed by the courts upon a pregnant woman towards her fetus or subsequently born child [my emphasis].” However, the Court continued, “the legislature may enact legislation in this field subject to the limits imposed by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms [my emphasis]”.

Moreover, the Court expressly pointed out that, although it would not hold the mother liable to the child, absent legislation to that affect, it recognized that a third party could be liable to the child for injuries negligently or intentionally caused to it. Consequently, contrary to Ms. Arthur’s analysis, this case, if anything, supports the possibility of passing a law recognizing the fetus as an unborn victim of violence with criminal penalties attached.

Ms. Arthur claims that “[s]eparating a woman from her fetus under the law creates a harmful adversarial relationship between a woman and her fetus”. It is difficult to see how that statement can apply to a situation in which a pregnant woman is criminally assaulted and loses the child which she has chosen to bring to term, which is the situation contemplated by Unborn Victims of Violence legislation.

Ms. Arthur recognizes a relationship between the mother and the fetus in speaking of converting that relationship to an adversarial one. Relationships involve more than one person. But, confusingly, Ms. Arthur also takes the position that the mother and fetus are one; that one is the mother; and the mother is the only person who should be recognized in law as a person. (This proposition mirrors the previous legal situation of married women: with marriage, a wife and husband became one person in law and that one was the husband.)

Contrary to Ms. Arthur’s claim, that Canadians who want to see some legal protections for fetuses “have a hidden agenda”, they have a very open one: They believe we need such law, including some governing abortion.

Moreover, in one sense, they are more pro-choice than the pro-choice abortion advocates. Respecting a woman’s decision to give birth to her baby and the wrong that is done when that decision is thwarted by the criminal act of another person, is to recognize and respect the full range of the choice that should be available to her. In contrast, the pro-choice advocates wish to protect abortion as the only legitimate choice, or at least the only one that should be recognized by the law.

Ms. Arthur’s argument, that it is punishment of a pregnant woman to punish somebody who kills a child she wants to have, is, like many of her claims, difficult to interpret in any way that makes sense.

Moreover, Ms. Arthur’s argument against any legal protections for fetuses on the grounds “that women have also been charged or jailed for murder for experiencing a stillbirth after refusing a Caesarean section” could never happen in Canada. The provision in the Criminal Code, that a child does not become a human being for the purposes of homicide law until after it has been delivered outside the body of its mother in a living state, is an absolute bar to that possibility.

Leaving that provision intact also means that offences created within an Unborn Victims of Violence act would not fall within the homicide provisions of the Criminal Code, but would be new, separate offences. Moreover, Parliament could choose expressly to exclude the mother as a possible accused for an offence under an Unborn Victims of Violence act and, likewise, any physician carrying out a legal abortion.

It is ironic that Ms. Arthur concludes “In the end, the best way to protect the fetus is to guarantee full rights for pregnant women”, when that right currently includes the right to have an abortion at nine months of pregnancy. It is also difficult to see how that is the best way to protect fetuses – or, indeed, pregnant women – from a third party aggressor especially when as Ms. Arthur recognizes pregnant women are at higher risk of domestic violence.

Margaret Somerville is an ethicist at McGill University and author of The Ethical Imagination: Journeys of the Human Spirit.

***

We have just learned that Professor Margaret Somerville (founding director of McGill Centre for Medicine, Ethics, and Law) and Mark Pickup (who has lived with MS for more than 20 years and is an advocate on issues related to assisted suicide and disability) will also be appearing tonight on The Verdict with Paula Todd.

The leader of Canada's Christian Heritage Party says he expects a long and drawn-out battle over three charges he and his Party are facing before the Canadian Human Rights Commission. Ron Gray and the CHP are charged for re-posting, to their website, a 5-year old article from WorldNet Daily about a purported connection between homosexuality and pederasty. Gray is also charged personally in connection with several columns he wrote and distributed to Party members, one of which laid out the reasons why Canada’s legalization of gay marriage should not have gone ahead. Gray admits it’s a bit unsettling to be dealing with the Human Rights Commission. "I wouldn’t say I’m worried. I do have some concerns (though), and one is the statement I’ve often encountered, that 'truth is not a defence in a human rights hearing'. I think that’s a bizarre concept."

Gray has urged his accuser, Edmonton homosexual activist Rob Wells; to charge him criminally if he truly believes the articles in question were hate-motivated. He admits part of that is because of the underlying principle of fairness that seems to be missing in Human Rights Commission cases. "In the criminal courts, the standard of judgement is 'beyond a reasonable doubt'", Gray says. "In the civil courts, the standard is the 'balance of probabilities'. But according to Madame Justice Claire L'Heureux-Dubé (of the Supreme Court of Canada) in Human Rights Tribunals, the standard of judgement is 'the feelings of the victim(s).' I don’t know how you can possibly expect justice out of that standard." Gray does say he’s more than prepared to go to prison over this, calling the case a defining one for free speech rights in Canada. We have a full interview with Ron Gray posted to our website today.

He we go again. This time the gay agenda is going after a political party and its leader. I think that is really stupid. Really stupid. Initially, I was pretty upset when I heard this, but as I started to logically think through it, I came to the resignation that only through this kind of persecution and sham justice can things really start to turn around in Canada. Freedom isn’t free and those of us who are on the front lines of speaking the truth can expect to get hit for it. Not really sure when other social conservative leaders are going to get nailed but it’s gonna happen. If a political party can get hauled before the Kangaroo court, then there is no limit to this fascism. If they can take down the leader of a political party, no social conservative group or individual is safe. And we can expect these socialists to continue in their quest to eradicate anything that does not square with their view of the rainbow.

1) It’s pretty pathetic that Mr. Wells is threatened by Ron Gray, whose party will never be a threat to anyone or anything. What did the CHP get in the last election - 0.1% of the vote? So much for the vaunted 'tolerance' we hear the Left bleating about. Tolerance for me but not for thee. You have to be a very insecure person to be threatened by the Christian Heritage Party.

2) It’s really quite amazing how the Left seeks to apply this kind of punishment through the Kangaroo Courts. What they are gaining in some cheap thrill by persecuting Christians, they are losing in legitimacy and justice. That might not sound like such a bad thing to them now while they are getting their licks in, but sooner or later those who are being picked on will not accept the tyranny or the yoke of those who use the system of law to oppress them. And that’s when those who are oppressed can no longer trust the government or the judiciary to deal with its citizens fairly. They will revolt and then things get really nasty. If you are a Lefty, listen to what I am saying and think really hard on the kind of nation you are creating. Because, even if we social conservatives are shoved nicely into the closet, just how long do you think it will be before you start using the Kangaroo Courts against one another to further your own pet causes?

A victory for science, for the pro-life movement, and for President Bush. – By Ryan T. Anderson

The stem cell wars are over. Leading scientists are telling us that they can pursue the most promising stem cell research without using--much less killing--human embryos. This breakthrough enables researchers to create human embryonic stem cells directly from adult cells. In fact, the new method may actually prove superior to embryo-destructive alternatives. This is the biggest stem cell advance since James Thomson became the first scientist to isolate embryonic stem cells, less than a decade ago.

It is a new study by Thomson himself that has caused the present stir, but this time Thomson is not alone. Accounts of independent research by two separate teams of scientists were published on November 20 – one in the journal Cell and one in the journal Science – documenting the production of pluri-potent human stem cells without using embryos or eggs or cloning or any morally questionable method at all.

The new technique is so promising that on November 16; Ian Wilmut announced that he would no longer seek to clone humans. Wilmut, you may remember, is the scientist who cloned Dolly the sheep. He recently sought and received a license from the British government to attempt to clone human embryos for research purposes. Now, citing the new technique, he has abandoned his plans.

It was only in 1998 that Thomson succeeded in isolating human embryonic stem cells. Though other types of human stem cells were known at the time (some were even in clinical trials), embryonic stem cells were thought to be the holy grail because they were believed to be more flexible. They were "pluripotent" – capable, in theory, of developing into any type of body tissue – whereas so-called adult stem cells were thought to be useful for forming a narrower range of tissue types. The problem with producing embryonic stem cells was that human embryos – nascent human beings – had to be destroyed in the process.

Even now, nine years later, embryonic stem cells are thought by many scientists to have greater potential than other types. This reputation persists even though adult stem cells are already used in therapies to treat several diseases and are being tested in hundreds of clinical trials, while not a single embryonic stem cell therapy exists, even in trials.

As anyone familiar with reparative medicine knows, immune rejection is one of the tallest hurdles to clear. The promise of cloning was that therapies could be produced using human embryos cloned directly from the patient – thus resulting in a genetic match. Cloning, it was said, would also provide an unlimited supply of human embryos. But many people thought human cloning with the sole intention to kill crossed an ethical line. In addition, human cloning would require an enormous number of human eggs – which could be obtained only by subjecting donors to painful and potentially dangerous hormonal-stimulation procedures. The fear was that likely "donors" would be poor women undergoing a distasteful procedure solely for the fee.

On August 9, 2001, President Bush waded into this morass. He issued an executive order that opened human embryonic stem cell research to federal funding for the first time ever. The order also restricted that funding, however, to research using existing embryonic stem cell lines: No more embryos would be created and destroyed for taxpayer-funded research. (Contrary to popular belief, Bush's order did not ban anything.) Opposition was fierce, but Bush stood firm.

Amid this controversy, a number of scientists discussed possible alternative sources of embryonic stem cells. William Hurlbut, a professor at Stanford and a member of the President's Council on Bioethics, proposed Altered Nuclear Transfer, a process that produced non-embryonic tumour-like entities that could then be harvested for the equivalent of embryonic stem cells. Some ethicists weren't fully sold, fearing that the tumour-like entities might be deformed embryos. Hurlbut's proposal was then modified, using oocyte cytoplasm to directly reprogram a cell's nucleus to make it pluripotent. Still, some critics were unconvinced. Finally, using mice, a Japanese scientist, Shinya Yamanaka, showed that he could create embryonic stem cells directly from adult cells, and within less than a year his study was replicated and significantly expanded by two separate research groups. Yamanaka went to work to make it happen with human cells.

But outside the scientific community, conventional wisdom held that these alternative sources, while interesting, were being proposed only to provide Bush with political cover during the waning years of his presidency. As soon as a new president was inaugurated, federal funds would flow into human cloning and embryo-destructive research. Or so the story went.

That expectation has now been shattered. Whether or not the next president shares Bush's pro-life convictions, it is highly unlikely that taxpayer funds will go to support embryo destruction, which has become not only unnecessary but also less efficient than the alternatives. That's the story coming out of Cell and Science.

In Cell, Yamanaka announces that the pluripotent stem cell-producing technique he used on mouse cells works with human cells. The resulting cells – called induced pluripotent stem cells, or iPS cells – are functionally identical to human embryonic stem cells: They possess all of the same properties. The difference is simply in the method of their production.

This new production technique is possible because the difference between a stem cell and an adult cell is not a matter of genetics but of epigenetics: which genes are expressed, how, and to what degree. Different cells have the same genes, expressed differently. So scientists had been searching for a way to remodel the gene expression of adult cells to transform them into stem cells. Yamanaka's team discovered a collection of four genes – Oct3/4, Sox2, Klf4, and c-Myc – that does precisely this. When introduced into adult cells, these genes directly reprogram the cells to a pluripotent state.

I asked Maureen Condic, professor of neurobiology and anatomy at the University of Utah School of Medicine, about these cells. "Direct reprogramming of adult cells to pluripotent stem cells is one of the most significant scientific findings of the last quarter century," she said. "This approach holds tremendous promise for advancing our scientific understanding of stem cells and for advancing the study of regenerative medicine. However, there are concerns regarding the safety of iPS cells for human therapies, due to the use of viral vectors that integrate into the cell's DNA, potentially causing dangerous mutations, and to the use of c-Myc, a gene that is associated with some forms of human cancer."

Yamanaka himself notes these pitfalls, but indicates that they should be surmountable: His technique works even when you take c-Myc out of the mix and use only the other three genes (though it achieves its results at a less efficient rate). Moreover, Yamanaka notes that integration of the virus into the DNA will not reduce the usefulness of induced pluripotent stem cells for study of human diseases in the laboratory, and that other non-viral means of introducing the reprogramming factors into cells are likely to be sufficient to generate iPS cells.

The Thomson approach described in Science avoided some of these drawbacks by using no c-Myc and optimizing the safety of the induced pluripotent stem cells from the start. His team used a different group of genes – Oct4, Sox2, Nanog, and Lin28 – to achieve the same end: direct reprogramming of adult human cells to the pluripotent state. Thomson's technique is also noteworthy because it uses a lenti-virus to introduce the gene group, which is the safest of retroviral integration methods. Work still needs to be done to ensure that viral vectors do not introduce dangerous mutations, but the scientists I spoke with thought this would be achievable with minimal delay.

What does all of this mean? James Thomson explains it best in his Science paper:

The human iPS cells described here meet the defining criteria we originally proposed for human embryonic stem cells, with the significant exception that the iPS cells are not derived from embryos. Similar to human embryonic stem cells, human iPS cells should prove useful for studying the development and function of human tissues, for discovering and testing new drugs, and for transplantation medicine. For transplantation therapies based on these cells, with the exception of autoimmune diseases, patient-specific iPS cell lines should largely eliminate the concern of immune rejection.

In short: The new technique produces patient-specific stem cells with all the benefits of stem cells from embryos, but without the production and destruction of human embryos or the use of human eggs.

Because induced pluripotent stem cells, created from a patient's own body, are a perfect genetic match, they should prove especially useful for both the study of diseases and the development of treatments. Thomson notes, "For drug development, human iPS cells should make it easier to generate panels of cell lines that more closely reflect the genetic diversity of a population, and should make it possible to generate cell lines from individuals predisposed to specific diseases."

Wilmut, of Dolly the sheep fame, agrees. Comparing his cloning methods with Yamanaka's, he said, "The work which was described from Japan of using a technique to change cells from a patient directly into stem cells without making an embryo has got so much more potential."

Nonetheless, there are serious challenges to overcome before pluripotent stem cells – whatever their source – will be ready for clinical therapies. All pluripotent stem cells carry a risk of tumour formation. And no one has yet figured out how to convert these stem cells into transplantable cells usable for therapies. Markus Grompe, professor in the department of molecular and medical genetics at the Oregon Health and Science University, director of the Oregon Stem Cell Center, and a board member of the International Society for Stem Cell Research, told me that "the therapeutic potential of all human pluripotent stem cells, including those generated by direct reprogramming, remains uncertain. No immediate cures should be expected from human pluripotent stem cell-based therapy, either embryo-derived or iPSC. First, the tumour risk of such cells must be harnessed, and second, the efficient conversion to transplantable cells must be mastered."

But scientists are hopeful that these hurdles will be overcome. Grompe points out that stem cells have important uses beyond therapy, and for these uses, too,

iPS cells are clearly superior to embryo-derived stem cells. They can be used to study how human organs and tissues form. And the insights gained are likely to lead to the development of new drugs and strategies to benefit human health. Direct reprogramming techniques make it possible to generate pluripotent cells from specific individuals with particular diseases. For example, it will be possible to make pluripotent stem cells from children with Fanconi's anaemia, a devastating genetic disease, and study the effects of candidate drugs on the formation of human blood. Another example, favoured by Ian Wilmut, is motor neuron disease (Lou Gehrig's disease). Here it will be of interest to examine the formation of nerves and motor neurons from patients with the actual disease, in an attempt to discover ways to help the cells survive and function better. These kinds of experiments are now immediately possible and will likely be the first application of iPS cells.

Thus, iPS cells may very well help us discover therapies for some of the most daunting genetic diseases. And they should be able to do so at last without controversy.

The ethicists I spoke with had only praise for the new developments. While some Catholic moral theologians had previously worried that reprogramming methods "mimicked conception" and might produce disabled embryos, the new technique should alleviate all fears. Concerns that scientists might "go too far back" and reprogram a cell to a toti-potent stage – making an actual embryo, not a stem cell – are quickly settled once one understands the science. To be an embryo requires not only a particular nuclear state, but also certain organizational factors that the oocyte cytoplasm provides. But no egg or cytoplasm is used in this method. Furthermore, two of the genes used for reprogramming – Nanog and Sox2 – are never found in embryos, only in stem cells. Their expression in reprogramming precludes toti-potency.

When I asked Father Thomas Berg, the executive director of the Westchester Institute for Ethics and the Human Person, about this concern, he replied, "From a Catholic perspective, reprogramming clears the bar in terms of reasonable concern for human dignity in biotech research: Never at any point in the process of reprogramming is there ever a danger of involving – even accidentally we might say – techniques that could bring about a human embryo, as would happen in cloning. The science of pluripotent stem cell research can move forward toward therapies and cures in a manner that is free of any ethical concerns."

What about all of those anti-science religious fanatics who used to scold about "playing God"? They don't exist. They're a media-conjured fantasy. Of all the many people I have talked with about stem cells, none has ever expressed any anti-science or anti-medicine inclinations.

Princeton's legal philosopher Robert P. George, who also serves on the President's Council on Bioethics, told me, "From the beginning we have been arguing that we must do everything we can to advance the cause of stem cell science but without sacrificing our respect for nascent human life and the principle of the inherent and equal dignity of each and every member of the human family. This latest news just goes to show that it really is possible."

It also is illustrative of the politics of science. Had a President Gore or a President Kerry allowed the science to go forward without regard for moral principle, it would have set a terrible precedent. A Gore or Kerry presidency would have bestowed federal blessing and taxpayer funds on laboratory work predicated on the assumption that embryonic human beings can be treated as spare parts and that cloning to kill is acceptable.

But because President Bush stood his ground, we have avoided that moral catastrophe. Had Bush lost either election, or had he caved to pressure from those who slandered him as "anti-science," it is very possible that the new method of stem cell production – the new gold standard, in all likelihood – would never have been found. Most likely, science and the public would have accommodated themselves to the mass production and mass killing of human embryos.

Indeed, it is not Bush alone, but the entire pro-life movement, that has been vindicated. For the petition-signers and the direct-mail organizers, the philosophers and the scientists who have defended the sanctity of human life, the Cell and Science stories come as a reward. When I spoke with Robert George, he praised Leon Kass, the former chairman of the President's Council, together with William Hurlbut, as the driving intellectual force against embryo-killing and in favour of finding alternative methods of obtaining pluripotent stem cells. "All along," George reports, "it was Dr. Kass who said that reprogramming methods would, if pursued vigorously, enable us to realize the full benefits of stem cell science while respecting human dignity."

George downplays his own role in shaping the president's thinking. After Congress passed a bill funding embryo-destructive stem cell research, Bush sought counsel. His approval ratings were in the cellar, and the general public largely supported the bill. Shortly before announcing his response to the legislation, the president invited George and Grompe to the Oval Office to discuss it with him. George presented the scientific and philosophical case for respecting the human embryo, while Grompe assured the president that alternatives such as reprogramming, if given time, would win the day. The president agreed and announced his veto. He was right.

And Congress was wrong. Considering the realities of Washington, it is no surprise that the pro-embryo-destruction forces in the House of Representatives actually teamed up to defeat a bill that would have funded research on reprogramming, which they dismissed as a distraction. President Bush then issued another executive order, this one instructing the National Institutes of Health to promote reprogramming research. As it turns out, the breakthrough Thomson study was partially funded by NIH.

Stem cell research wasn't a prime issue during the 2000 campaign. Politically, the controversy wasn't yet ripe, though it became so just months into Bush's first term. Similarly, now, we don't know what the next biotech breakthrough will be. Whatever it is, we can be certain that some people will demand we pursue it. Having political leaders of principle who insist on ethical standards in scientific research, then, is always of the utmost importance.

At present, people on all sides of the old stem cell debate should be able to celebrate. The recent news gives scientists a better method of producing embryonic stem cells while retaining our nation's commitment to the equal and inherent dignity of all human beings. Richard Doerf-linger of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops pointed out the happy irony: "The scientist who gave us human embryonic stem cell research has helped find the way to go beyond embryo-destructive research, and in response to these new findings, the scientist who gave us cloning tells us that the cloning agenda is on the way to being obsolete."

Ryan T. Anderson is an assistant editor at First Things. A Phillips Foundation fellow, he is the assistant director of the Program in Bioethics at the Witherspoon Institute of Princeton, N.J.

(View online) Trading on the Female Body, by Evan and Lani Rosa, CBC Staff Writers

On November 9, 2007, before a large audience in the Bay Area of California, speakers that would normally have plenty to disagree about came together in unity, with a common goal: to call for a moratorium on the exploitation of women through the trading of human eggs. This is a fight to raise awareness and promote safe research and regulation of this industry.

Jennifer Lahl, the National Director of the CBC, moderated a panel of five presenters, representing a wide range of experience and perspectives.

Diane Beeson, Ph. D., Director, Hands Off Our Ovaries
Dana Cody, Esq., Executive Director, Life Legal Defence Foundation
Nicole Marchand, Student, San Francisco State University, Hand Off Our Ovaries Board of Directors
Calla Papademas, Stanford grad and survivor of health problems related to egg donation
David Prentice, Ph. D., Family Research Council

But what's the controversy over trading human eggs? Well, for such a serious international problem, it's alarming how few people even recognize this as an issue. The event's panellists clarified the facts, and cut through the often-disingenuous media fog that too often clouds the issue to the public.

Dr. Prentice led off the discussion, noting the promise of stem cells in treating injuries and diseases, some currently without cure. In order to continue embryonic stem cell research (ESCR) in this field, researchers need the raw material for developing effective therapeutic treatments. And human eggs are the hot commodity. And they have only one source: the female body.

For effective research, Prentice explained, up to 100 eggs are required per patient. Scientists agree that as many as 1.7 billion human eggs would be needed to fully treat just one disease group in one country. So that would require 170 million women of childbearing age to step forward and donate 100 eggs. There aren't even that many fertile women in the United States alone. Now you should have a better idea of the international scale of this problem; women everywhere could be adversely affected.

Prentice went on to offer a more viable and ethically sound solution: adult stem cells. Adult stem cells – many donated by the patients themselves – have already been effective in treating at least 73 scientifically peer reviewed cases of disease and injury, producing astounding results of healing and health improvement.

Compared to ESCR's zero cases of successful treatment, it seems we have a safer and more effective alternative than politicians and stem cell enthusiasts are willing to admit.

Dana Cody of Life Legal Defence Foundation represented the legal front in the battle to regulate egg trade. Cody assisted in litigation to challenge California's Proposition 71. Prop 71 was approved by a small majority of California voters in 2004 and has become the groundbreaking initiative that will forge the way for embryonic stem cell research to move forward. Unable to repeal the legislation, women are left to fend for themselves. Cody suggests that women should now take initiative to become educated on what the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (CIRM) is doing to regulate and oversee the research under Prop 71, and demand measures to protect the women affected. At a time when a shortage of eggs is of increasing concern to researchers, women must be aware that their health and lives are at threat by legislation like Prop 71.

Dr. Diane Beeson spoke from years of experience in the area of women's health and fertility, providing a sociological history of the egg trade up to the present-day push for therapeutic cloning research. Beeson cited a moment of personal realization that Prop 71 allocates “a vast amount of money to prioritize the most speculative and least successful form of stem cell research – embryo cloning research.” As a lifelong pro-choice advocate, she is deeply concerned that such experiments would require huge amounts of human eggs “and that acquiring these eggs would jeopardize the health of large numbers of young women.”

Calla Papademus, who related her experiences as a respondent to an egg donation ad. Papademus fell into the target market for egg donors. Motivated by unselfish, altruistic desire to “help make an infertile couple's dream come true” she signed up, and began self-administering hormone injections of Lupron immediately. She immediately experienced serious side effects, including debilitating migraine headaches, loss of vision, and nausea.

Calla's experience with egg donation is indelibly marked with irresponsibility by the donation agency, which has forever changed Calla. When she had questions about the consent form, she was hurried and encouraged to “just sign it.” After repeated calls complaining of her side effects, a nurse from the agency finally responded that it was all part of taking the Lupron, and that she should continue to endure taking it. Ultimately, the agency's inadequate screening process and neglect cost Calla the ability to naturally conceive children. Due to a small tumour on her pituitary gland, she had experienced irregular menstrual cycles as a teen, which is an immediate disqualification as an egg donor. A simple question by the agency (which it denies having neglected) for Calla – but through neglect, the Lupron enlarged her tumour, which cut off the blood supply to her brain, causing a major stroke and paralysis.

The evening ended with a call to action from Nicole Marchand, a student and Hands Off Our Ovariesintern. After hearing stories like Calla's, Marchand responded with action, and is calling others to join her. Formed in 2006, Hands Off Our Ovaries “seeks a moratorium on egg extraction for research purposes until such time as global discourse and scientific research yields information sufficient to establish adequate informed consent.” Marchand and her colleagues reach out to other young women on college campuses who are vulnerable to solicitations for their eggs, speak to classes, post warnings, and continue to fight the human egg trade through events such as this.

Humanity continues to progress scientifically and technologically – developing new research methodology, unprecedented procedures, and dreaming “bigger and better” dreams about our human future. So much is unprecedented. And therein lies the problem. Without the foreknowledge to see the effects (and side-effects) of this research for the short- and long- term, we continue to risk lives and resources for the sake of progress.

The message from Trading on the Female Body was clear: At a time when government and industry do not act to protect women, it is critical that as human beings, we must act to protect each other, continue to raise awareness, and seek to equip individuals and communities to affect change.

Lani Rosa is a graduate of Indiana University, where she earned her B.S. in Economics and Public Policy and B.A. in Spanish. Since relocating to the Bay Area from Kentucky she has worked in areas of microeconomic development, database consulting, and accounting within the non-profit and private sectors. She lives in Emeryville, CA with her husband, Evan, where she enjoys reading and baking pies.

Evan Rosa is a graduate of University of California, Berkeley, where he earned B.A.'s in Philosophy and Linguistics. He currently works as a communication consultant, and enjoys playing and writing music, an earthy cup of coffee and a good surf session. He and his wife Lani live in Emeryville, CA.

Keep your finger on the pulse of the bioethics discussion. Sign up here for our weekly bioethics e-newsletter.

Send me this weekly e-newsletter.

Jennifer Lahl giving briefing on the Hill Nov. 14, 3-4pm to raise awareness of human egg trafficking and the growing threat to women's health and safety. Visit our homepage for updates.

For every search you make with Internet search engine Good Search, raise 1 cent for CBC.

Campaign Life Coalition National Newsletter (Current)

National Post – Full Comment – November 22, 2007