We are Catholics who feel a moral obligation and an urgency to communicate with our fellow Catholics in Missouri .   We, along with many of our fellow Catholics, are gravely disillusioned by the misinformation, scare tactics, and demonization of good people coming forth from opponents of the Missouri Stem Cell Initiative - Amendment 2.  

We are from all walks of life, including physicians, nurses, health care administrators, lawyers and a former Missouri Attorney General and United States Senator.    We have carefully considered the literature on both sides of this issue and we have read Amendment 2 in its entirety.   With our collective backgrounds in medicine, law, and other areas, we understand very well the provisions of Amendment 2 and are quite disturbed by the outright distortions being spread.  

We have wrestled with the issues surrounding this initiative and conclude that our support for Amendment 2 is wholly consistent with our faith.    A Catholic ethicist who has looked closely at Amendment 2 stated recently in a published essay, "People of good will and people of faith have substantive reasons to support the Missouri Stem Cell Initiative."   (Dr. Gerard Magill, Saint Louis University Center for Health Care Ethics, who holds a licentiate degree in moral theology from the Pontifical Gregorian University in Rome, Italy.)

We, like many Missourians, support the Stem Cell Initiative because we don't believe politicians in Jefferson City should limit the ability of our medical schools, hospitals, doctors and patients to access the best America has to offer in medical research, treatments, and cures.   For several years in a row, politicians have attempted to pass a law that would make promising research a felony and treat doctors and patients who receive the benefits as criminals. Amendment 2 should not be needed -- but unfortunately it is.     Amendment 2 will ensure that Missouri citizens have access to all stem cell research, treatments, and cures that are allowed in our country and available to other Americans.  It will also ensure that our world-renowned medical schools and hospitals will be able to help find and provide those cures.    Amendment 2 will keep Missouri on par with other states; it does not "legalize" anything that is not allowed under federal law and available in other states.   As citizens dedicated to the well-being of our community, we see the critical importance of this measure.

Amendment 2 is very moderate in its approach.  Some people want to ban all stem cell research.  At the other extreme, there are those who would like to see research proceed completely unfettered.  We believe that Amendment 2 strikes a responsible balance between these two extremes.   Amendment 2 establishes clear ethical boundaries and safety guidelines for stem cell research in Missouri .  Since no such requirements currently exist, if Amendment 2 were to fail, there would be no such boundaries in Missouri to ensure research is ethical.

We are disappointed by the number of false claims about Amendment 2 that are circulating in our community.  We feel it is important to set the record straight on these issues so that voters can cast their ballots based on facts.  

Fact #1:    Amendment 2 does not promote any particular type of stem cell research.  Because scientists cannot predict which types of stem cell research will lead to the best treatments for each disease or injury, the medical and scientific communities (including American Medical Association, National Institutes of Health, and hundreds of other medical, patient, and scientific organizations) feel strongly that all forms of research should proceed, and Amendment 2 will ensure that wherever success is found in treating disease, we in Missouri will benefit.

Fact #2:   Stem cell research does not involve a pregnancy; and it does not involve abortion.  Embryonic stem cell research involves microscopic cells in a lab dish.   These cells are blank, unprogrammed cells (not specialized like a blood, nerve, or muscle cell) that are never to be implanted in a woman's uterus and therefore will never become part of a pregnancy.   We have seen anti-Amendment 2 pamphlets and bumper stickers with pictures of fetuses - these are intended to prey on good peoples' misunderstanding of the science and the terminology.   We find these scare tactics to be reprehensible.

Fact #3:    Stem cell research does not involve the cloning of a human being, and Amendment 2 strictly bans any attempt to do so.  What Amendment 2 does permit (as long as federal law permits) is the creation of stem cells through a process that utilizes a patient's own single skin cell and an unfertilized egg.  There is no sperm involved and no fertilization.  This process is sometimes called "therapeutic cloning" because it copies the patient's own cell, and the new cells can potentially be used to treat the patient's disease.   Amendment 2 specifically bans any attempt to initiate a pregnancy with these cells or to create a human version of Dolly the Sheep.   Without Amendment 2, cloning a person is entirely legal in Missouri.   Amendment 2 will prohibit it.

We are reminded that over the years churches have struggled with many moral issues surrounding science and medicine.  For centuries, churches opposed using cadavers for research.   In the 18th century, some churches opposed vaccination saying that if a child was ordained to die of small pox, it would be a "sin" to save the child with the "trick" of a vaccine.   Imagine how many lives would have been lost if such views had prevailed.  Fortunately, as science progressed, these moral issues were overcome.   In the 1970s, churches opposed the use of some routine vaccines (such as the measles vaccine) because they are derived from cells that were originally developed using tissues from abortion.    

Now religious people every day in good conscience accept such vaccines, and conservative religious doctrine now approves their use, because of the benefits of preventing the spread of disease.   With embryonic stem cell research, which does not in any way involve abortion, it is a much easier moral decision in our minds to come down in favor of its potential for healing and alleviating suffering.    

We respect the moral concerns of all Catholics and of the Catholic Church.  We, ourselves, have considered these issues.  Each person must weigh their own individual beliefs.  Each person must reasonably consider those they know - friends and loved ones - who might one day benefit from this research.   As Dr. Magill has stated, "This is not religion versus science.  There are people of faith and people of goodwill on both sides."   Each person must reach his or her own conclusion - not allowing the many false claims and scare tactics to cloud individual judgment.  For us, after serious deliberation on these considerations, we feel YES on 2 is not only a reasonable vote, but the right vote.

CATHOLICS FOR AMENDMENT 2

Steering Committee
Senator Tom Eagleton, Co-Chair
Dr. Virginia Weldon, Co-Chair

Rodger A. & Leann Brand

Don Clayton

Dr. John F. DiPersio

Bob & Becky Duepner

Mark D. Eagleton III

Lee Fetter

Patrick & JoAnn Fisher

Otto C. & Dorothy M. Hoelscher

E. Michael Houlihan

Chris Hrdina

Cynthia J. Hrdina

Ben Johnson

Michael Kelley

Robert Kelley

Robert Klein

Philippe de Laperouse

Jack Martorelli

Tara Parkhurst

William D. & Megan S. Rowe

Linda Short

Rose Windmiller

Will & Laura Winter

Anita Yeckel