What does President Obama mean when he asks us to 'work through" our conflicts?

For consideration: an excerpt from President Barack Obama's commencement speech at Notre Dame:

The soldier and the lawyer may both love this country with equal passion, and yet reach very different conclusions on the specific steps needed to protect us from harm. The gay activist and the evangelical pastor may both deplore the ravages of HIV/AIDS, but find themselves unable to bridge the cultural divide that might unite their efforts. Those who speak out against stem cell research may be rooted in an admirable conviction about the sacredness of life, but so are the parents of a child with juvenile diabetes who are convinced that their son's or daughter's hardships can be relieved.

The question, then -- the question then is how do we work through these conflicts? Is it possible for us to join hands in common effort? As citizens of a vibrant and varied democracy, how do we engage in vigorous debate? How does each of us remain firm in our principles, and fight for what we consider right, without, as Father John said, demonizing those with just as strongly held convictions on the other side?

I've been thinking about the President's words.

A soldier and a lawyer may disagree over this or that aspect of U.S. foreign policy. (Measures taken "to protect the country from harm" are presumably acceptable to the extent that they are in conformity with what is typically referred to as the just war tradition or in secular terms the "laws of war.") There is little disputing that both can be motivated by a patriotic love of their country.

Responding to the horrors of HIV / AIDS, the evangelical pastor might counsel abstinence; the gay activist the distribution of condoms. That both are motivated by a desire to curb an epidemic is understandable; howbeit so long as they differ over the sanctity of marriage and the purpose of sexuality, we can expect little chance for "unity."

Lastly, we can emphathize with the parents of a child with juvenile diabetes and their desire to relieve pain and suffering. What is this, but the natural instinct of every parent?

And yet, I really have to wonder what does Obama's "common effort" really amount to?

Is he so naive as to expect that our empathy for the other's situation will compel us to muzzle our moral protest against the evil of utilitarian experimentation upon human embroyos?

The willfull murder of a child in the womb? or smothering the last breath out of the result of a botched abortion?

What does our President mean when from the pulpit of Notre Dame he asks us to "work through" such conflicts?

What does this actually amount to, except "can't we all just get along" -- in spite of, or at the expense of, our principles and convictions?

Our President wants us to be "firm in our principles" -- but it seems to me that he has not seriously grappled with the implications of the Church's teaching that

"Human life is sacred because from its beginning it involves the creative action of God and it remains for ever in a special relationship with the Creator, who is its sole end. God alone is the Lord of life from its beginning until its end: no one can under any circumstance claim for himself the right directly to destroy an innocent human being."

George vs. Kmiec

Robert P. George and Doug Kmiec spar over email on the question: Does President Obama's executive order on embryonic stem cell research allow federally funded human cloning? - George in the affirmative; Kmiec disagrees. The debate hinges on President Obama's statement that he opposed "reproductive cloning. According to George, this is meant as a loophole:

A ban on "reproductive cloning" is a ban on implanting a human embryo produced by cloning and permitting the embryonic human to develop into infancy. That is why pro-life critics of the ban on "reproductive cloning," including the Pro-Life Secretariat of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, refer to the legislation proposing the ban as the "clone and kill bill." That description is literally true. The bill forbids not the practice of somatic cell nuclear transfer or any other cloning technique, but allowing the cloned human being to survive. ...

What President Obama supports and has now opened the door to funding is human cloning—somatic cell nuclear transfer to create human embryos. What he opposes is permitting human embryos to be implanted if they were created by somatic cell nuclear transfer.

Bishop Thomas J. Olmsted: "President Obama is forcing all American taxpayers to pay for this homicidal research"

The Bishop of Phoenix in Arizona has written a straight-talking column responding to President Barack Obama's executive order providing federal funding for embryonic stem cell research LifeSitenews.com reports:

"This means that American taxpayers will now be paying for the killing of human beings at a very early stage in their lives (as embryos), so that scientific research can make use of them for experiments that may or may not yield positive results," writes Bishop Thomas J. Olmsted in his diocesan newspaper, the Catholic Sun.

Unwilling to sugar-coat the reality with polite euphemisms, Bishop Olmsted says, "We U.S. taxpayers will now be forced to pay, whether we wish to or not, for the killing of our youngest brothers and sisters on the dubious hypothesis that their murders might, in the future, benefit others."

"What President Obama is doing is forcing all American taxpayers to pay for this homicidal research," he said.

Read the full text of Bishop Olmsted's column: "What should science trump?" in the Catholic Sun March 10, 2009.

Obama overturns Bush administration's limition on embryonic stem stell research; REVOKES funding for ethical research into 'pluripotent' stem cells

Today, President Obama lifted the Bush administration's limits on embryonic stem cell research:

The president on Monday signaled a clear shift in tone from the Bush administration on a broad range of scientific issues.

Obama overturned an order signed by President Bush in 2001 that barred the National Institutes of Health from funding research on embryonic stem cells beyond using 60 cell lines that existed at that time.

Bush twice vetoed legislation that would have expanded federally funded embryonic stem cell research. Those siding with Bush say scientific advances allow researchers to conduct groundbreaking research without destroying human embryos.

House Republicans have rallied in opposition to the order, including Catholic House Republican Leader John Boehner:

"This decision runs counter to President Obama's promise to be a president for all Americans. For a third time in his young presidency, the President has rolled back important protections for innocent life, further dividing our nation at a time when we need greater unity to tackle the challenges before us. I fully support stem cell research, but I draw the line at taxpayer-funded research that requires the destruction of human embryos, and millions of Americans feel similarly. As we move forward, I am hopeful that the President will re-evaluate this and other controversial decisions that put government at odds with the sanctity of human life. Non-embryonic stem cell research is not only showing great promise in the laboratory, but its applications are already being used to treat scores of diseases and medical conditions. Indeed, science and respect for human life can coexist. Politicians in Washington would be well-served to recognize this fact before they ask taxpayers to subsidize the destruction of innocent human life simply to advance a particular agenda. Instead of asking taxpayers to pay for efforts that destroy life, Congress and the Administration should support bipartisan solutions like Rep. Randy Forbes' Patients First Act, which would promote stem cell research that is actually getting results."

and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell:

"The administration's announcement on embryonic stem cell research represents a troubling shift in U.S. policy. With this announcement, the government is, for the first time, incentivizing the creation and destruction of human embryos at the expense of the U.S. taxpayer. I support biomedical research and I believe the administration would be far better served by directing taxpayer funds to research on non-embryonic stem cells, which is both effective and ethical."

Joined by "Snowflake families" (children, who were formerly stored embryos and their parents), Representative Chris H. Smith stated that:

President Obama has chosen to turn back the clock, and starting today, will force taxpayers to subsidize the unethical, the unworkable over what works, and hype and hyperbole over hope. ...

Assertions that leftover embroyos are better off dead so that their stem cells can be derived is dehumanizing and cheapens human life. There is no such thing as leftover human life. Ask the snowflake children -- cryogenically frozen embroyos who were adopted -- their lives are precious and priceless.

(Click here to read Rep. Smith's full statement on Obama's stem cell order).

In 2005, Rep. Smith introduced the Cord Blood Stem Cell Act of 2005 to provide for the collection and maintenance of human [umbelical] cord blood stem cells for the treatment of patients and research.

The Democrats for Life also issued a forceful denunciation of Obama's decision:

DFLA has had a productive relationship both with the campaign and the early stages of the new Administration. To have no opportunity to weigh in on this controversial issue signals a cooling of our relations. DFLA is against President Obama’s decision, period. There are workable and successful options available to private sector research operations that use umbilical cord blood and non embryonic stem cells. To frame this decision as a necessity to cure finding medical research is not accurate. While we have zero confidence that a call for reversal of this Executive Order will prevail, we are hopeful that the President will heed our call for common ground solutions in dealing with pro-life Democrats.

* * *
Update! As First Things' Wesley J. Smith points out, "We all know that President Obama rescinded the Bush funding restrictions for ESCR. But that isn’t all he did today. He also rescinded Executive Order 13435 of June 20, 2007.":

The Administration didn’t publicize this part of the President’s nasty work, but the now dead 2007 Bush order explicitly required funding for “alternative methods” of stem cell research—such as the new induced pluripotent stem cells (IPSC), a process that changes skin or other cells such as hair follicles into pluripotent stem cells without making or destroying embryos. IPSCs offer so much promise—and all without the ethical contentiousness of human cloning and embryonic stem cell research. Indeed, these alternative methods are one of the few areas in which people who are pro-life and pro-choice, conservative and liberal, pro and anti-ESCR can agree upon, the very type of policy that this president said he wanted to pursue.

Relevant Reading

• Only a week ago it was reported by the Washington Post that "Scientists have developed what appears to be a safer way to create a promising alternative to embryonic stem cells, boosting hopes that such cells could sidestep the moral and political quagmire that has hindered the development of a new generation of cures."
  
• Executive Order on Embryonic Stem Cells 'A Sad Victory of Politics over Science and Ethics,' Says Cardinal Rigali United States Conference of Catholic Bishops. March 9, 2009.
  
• Perpetuating a Needless Stem-Cell War: Obama's decision is bad ethics, bad science, and bad politics, by Ryan T. Anderson. Weekly Standard March 9, 2009.
  
• Obama’s False Choice: What the president could stand to learn from his predecessor on science policy, by Yuval Levin. National Review March 9, 2009.
  
• Stem Cells: A Political History, by Joseph Bottum and Ryan T. Anderson. First Things November 2008.
  
• The President Politicizes Stem-Cell Research: Taxpayers have a right to be left out of it, by Robert P. George and Eric Cohen. Wall Street Journal March 10, 2009.
  

Obama poised to reverse Bush Administration policies on embryonic stem cell research, Mexico City Policy

The Washington Post reports that transition advisers have compiled a list of about 200 Bush administration actions and executive orders that could be swiftly undone to reverse White House policies:

Obama himself has signaled, for example, that he intends to reverse Bush's controversial limit on federal funding of embryonic stem cell research, a decision that scientists say has restrained research into some of the most promising avenues for defeating a wide array of diseases, such as Parkinson's.

Bush's August 2001 decision pleased religious conservatives who have moral objections to the use of cells from days-old human embryos, which are destroyed in the process.

But Rep. Diana DeGette (D-Colo.) said that during Obama's final swing through her state in October, she reminded him that because the restrictions were never included in legislation, Obama "can simply reverse them by executive order." Obama, she said, "was very receptive to that." Opponents of the restrictions have already drafted an executive order he could sign.

The new president is also expected to lift a so-called global gag rule barring international family planning groups that receive U.S. aid from counseling women about the availability of abortion, even in countries where the procedure is legal, said Cecile Richards, the president of Planned Parenthood Federation of America. When Bill Clinton took office in 1993, he rescinded the Reagan-era regulation, known as the Mexico City policy, but Bush reimposed it.

"We have been communicating with his transition staff" almost daily, Richards said. "We expect to see a real change."

ObamaCatholics - is this the change you were looking for?

Another Adult Stem Cell Advance: The Ethically Dangerous Alternative is Becoming Increasingly Moot

Here is the Washington Post link from today. In the real world, Obama just lost an issue. Yet, I heard today an Obama radio ad in Michigan attacking McCain/Palin on stem cell research, and the Obama campaign will likely not revise its ads to match the new scientific reality. It is up to the rest of us to let others know that, increasingly, when they hear the phrase "stem cell research," they should think first, primarily, and preferentially of adult stem cell research as the most promising alternative that can deliver both scientifically and ethically. It seems to me that the days of embryonic stem cell research being the first thing we think of when we hear the phrase "stem cell research" may very well be coming to an end. Here is an excerpt from the story linked to above:

"This is the latest in a line of studies showing that the practical problems associated with using 'reprogrammed' adult cells are rapidly being solved," Richard Doerflinger of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops said in an e-mail.

McCain Campaign runs questionable advertisement on stem cells, giving pro-lifers reason to doubt their integrity

Via Jeff Cullbreath comes word of a disturbing radio advertisement from the McCain-Palin campaign on stem cell research. The text of the ad runs as follows (click here to listen):

They’re the original mavericks. Leaders. Reformers. Fighting for real change.
John McCain will lead his Congressional allies to improve America’s health.
Stem cell research to unlock the mystery of cancer, diabetes, heart disease.
Stem cell research to help free families from the fear and devastation of illness.
Stem cell research to help doctors repair spinal cord damage, knee injuries, serious burns.
Stem cell research to help stroke victims.

And, John McCain and his Congressional allies will invest millions more in new NIH medical research to prevent disease.

Medical breakthroughs to help you get better, faster.
Change is coming.

McCain-Palin and Congressional allies.

The leadership and experience to really change Washington and improve your health.

Paid for by McCain-Palin 2008 and the Republican National Committee.

I don't think, as Jeff does, that this advertisement can be taken as a "campaign promise to aggressively fund ESCR." But the (deliberate) ambiguity is indeed the issue.

The abundance of medical breakthroughs that have occurred have been with adult stem cells -- indeed, adult stem cells, not embryonic, have played a role on successes related to the diseases and ailments mentioned in the advertisement. And given the media's propensity to over-hype what few advances made with ESCR and practically bury from the public eye adult stem cell accomplishments, the McCain campaign could have used this as an opportunity to emphasize this point.

On his campaign website, McCain now states:

will strongly support funding for promising research programs, including amniotic fluid and adult stem cell research and other types of scientific study that do not involve the use of human embryos.

Where federal funds are used for stem cell research, Senator McCain believes clear lines should be drawn that reflect a refusal to sacrifice moral values and ethical principles for the sake of scientific progress, and that any such research should be subject to strict federal guidelines.

But with the publication of this advertisement, they've given pro-lifers reason to doubt their integrity on this matter.

Update (Via Jay Anderson)

According to Jeffrey Young @ The Hill, the McCain campaign confirms the reason for the "ambiguity":

The ad does not specifically refer to embryonic research, which is opposed by most politicians and activists who, like McCain, do not support abortion rights.

The omission is not a signal that McCain is backing away from his record in favor of embryonic stem cell research, spokesman Brian Rogers said.

“Clearly, John McCain supports it,” he said, emphasizing that the ad is intended to refer to all forms of stem cell research, including experiments using human embryos and those using cells from adults.

The Obama campaign dismissed the radio spot, charging that McCain should have fought harder when President Bush twice vetoed stem cells legislation and that his choice of Palin signifies weak support for embryonic stem cell research.

Jeff Cullbreath was right and I stand corrected: what an extremely disappointing (and stupid, stupid, stupid) move on McCain's part.

Related Perspectives

• McCain-Palin: “Change is Coming” on Stem Cell Research Policy:

  Indeed, “change is coming” to Washington. It looks like no matter who is president, we can say goodbye to our current stem cell policy as laid out in the White House stem cell report: Advancing Stem Cell Science Without Destroying Human Life.

• Off the [McCain] bandwagon? - Colleague Jay Anderson re-thinks his support.
  
• The ever-provocative ZippyCatholic on why a vote for McCain is a vote for a "Human Cannibal", with a rebuttal by Dr. Michael Liccione (Sacramentum Vitae).
  
• Dale Price: "McCain-Palin: Because the alternative will make you vomit."
  
• Not just abortion - Paul Zummo (Crankycon)
  
• Perfect vs. Good, by Red Cardigan, addressing the question: is it morally acceptable for a Catholic to vote for a candidate who supports that which is intrinsically evil?
  

Another Major Advance in Adult Stem Cell Research

See this Washington Post link. Why then all the rush into the ethical quagmire of embryonic stem cell research? The sensible rule for all, whether Catholic or not, believer or not: resolve all doubts in favor of life. How much more pressing that sensible rule is when we have an ethically clean alternative that does not threaten life but promises only to enhance life for all.

Senator Brownback: "A Changed Stem Cell Debate"

A Changed Stem Cell Debate - Sam Brownback (First Things' On The Square. Dec. 12, 2007) -- on the implications of the recent scientific breakthroughs involving "pluripotent" stem cells:

This shifts the debate fundamentally. Those who had moral reservations about research on the youngest of humans but were persuaded of the need to pursue treatments can now support this promising research without compromising their pro-life conviction. At the same time, those who claimed that embryonic research was the only promising way forward can unite around a promising new technique that presents no ethical dilemmas.

What the vast majority of Americans want is now possible: the pursuit of promising research that does not cross ethical lines, honors human dignity, and preserves innocent life.

This does not mark the end of the stem cell debate. In the coming weeks, I will work with my Senate colleagues on possible ways to allocate funding for this approach and for other research that seeks ethical cures we can be proud of. I will continue to push for a ban on all forms of human cloning, a practice that demeans the dignity of the human person.

The irony is that opponents of embryonic stem cell research were considered to be anti-science or behind the times. Advocates of embryonic stem cell research were thought to be in a long line of pioneers fighting the restraints of religious doctrine to push forward with scientific research.

Instead, quite the opposite is the case. The new research shows that science and morality need not be pitted against each another. Still less, the promise of cures for disease need not be pitted against the infinite value of the youngest of human lives.

Rather, what we knew in our hearts all along has turned out to be true. The strong ought to protect the weak and science is not to be feared, nor is it to be worshiped, but rather it should be regulated by sound ethical guidelines. In doing so, science has shown the path forward: ethical research, promising science, and cures everyone can live with.

The Truth About Stem Cells from Catholic Congressman Chris Smith

Via The Hill Congress Blog:

One might think that advances in adult and cord-blood stem cells would silence or at a minimum refocus those who insist that taxpayer dollars be used to subsidize the killing of human embryos. Strangely, the obsession to use federal taxpayer dollars for what could very well be a decades long process (where failure remains a strong possibility) remains.Despite many important advancements in adult and cord-blood stem cell research, media hype continues to focus on embryonic stem cells with little regard given to the fact that nearly 70 human clinical applications using adult stem cells have been published in peer reviewed journals.


In fact, I recently read about new developments in the adult stem cell field. In April, doctors at Wake Forest constructed new bladders for seven patients with bladder disease using the patients’ own stem cells. In March, British doctors reported treating five patients with liver failure with the patients own adult stem cells. Four of the five patients showed improvement and two regained near normal liver function. Late last year, Swedish researchers successfully used adult stem cells to generate functioning human brain cells, a procedure that may lead to treatments for spinal-cord injuries and neurological damage and diseases. International researchers also developed embryonic-like stem cells from umbilical-cord blood, a remarkable development that should end the practice of killing perfectly healthy human embryos to derive stem cells.

The misconception that the United States is falling behind or losing scientists because of the current embryonic stem cell policy is simply unsubstantiated. There is no statistical evidence that scientists are leaving the country due to the current policy.

In comparison to the progress achieved by researchers in adult and cord-blood stem cells, developments in the field of embryonic stem cells are disappointing. Despite years of research in animal embryonic stem cells and nearly eight years in the human-embryonic variety, research in embryonic stem cells have often resulted in failure and has a troubling tendency for these cells to form tumors. As experimental failures mount, predictions of eventual success have quietly changed from years to decades.

These failures of embryonic stem cell research are magnified by the fact that the process itself destroys human lives at their most vulnerable beginning stage. The notion that leftover human embryos, a grossly misleading and dehumanizing term, are just going to be destroyed anyway and poured down the drain is simply mythical in nature.

Last year, President Bush welcomed “snowflake families” to the White House. These families adopted embryos stored in frozen orphanages left from other couples attempts to conceive through in vitro fertilization. They have since seen their adopted embryos grow into happy, healthy children. These children are living examples of why not one taxpayer dollar should be used for the destruction of human embryos. Once the government not only permits but funds the destruction of human life in the name of science, all life is devalued and the culture of death becomes even more pervasive.

Technorati tags: Chris Smith, Congress, Catholic, Stem Cells

Catholic Senator Backs Funding for Embryonic Stem Cell Research Alternatives

Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- Leading pro-life Sen. Rick Santorum (R-PA) has signed on to legislation that would provide funding for a process that some hope will lead to obtaining embryonic stem cells for research without the destruction of human life. Santorum, who opposes the unproven research, joined with Sen. Arlen Specter, who supports it, at a news conference to discuss the bill. The measure is meant to be a compromise to a bill that would overturn President Bush's limits on using taxpayer funds for the destructive research. It would require the National Institutes of Health to find and fund new methods for obtaining human embryonic stem cells without destroying human life. Santorum said the new methods would not be "controversial" according to the Philadelphia Inquirer, though pro-life groups are skeptical. "There are some who believe that ... there is controversy around these new entities -- these collections of cells -- as to whether it is an embryo or not," Santorum said during a news conference at the University of Pennsylvania. "I feel comfortable, given all of the conversations I have had with a number of bioethicists, that these are appropriate steps to take."

For more on this news see Catholics for Santorum.

Tags: Santorum, Catholic, Senate, Stem Cells

Pennsylvania bishops issue document on stem-cell research

Good info on this topic, so important to many of us. One question from the document:

What about the use of government funding for embryonic stem cell research?

Government funding would further encourage researchers to destroy human embryos. We must oppose the use of our tax dollars for research that involves the destruction of human life. When we enter the realm of public policy, each of us has an obligation to speak up and to take a stand for human life. We cannot proceed down the road of scientific development without sufficient moral reflection and ethical judgment.

You can read the entire document here.

(Via CNA)

The Other Stem Cell Bill

Stem Cell Therapeutic and Research Act Press Release

(Washington, DC) - Landmark legislation creating a new federally-funded stem cell therapeutic and research program for the scientifically sound collection and inventory of umbilical cord blood will be on the floor of the House of Representatives the week of May 23rd, [Catholic] Rep. Chris Smith (R-NJ) said today.

The Stem Cell Therapeutic and Research Act creates a new federal cord blood stem cell program, reauthorizes and expands the current federal bone marrow stem cell program, and establishes a new federally-funded data program with a single electronic access point so doctors and patients can research and tap into the therapy that is best suited to treat the life-threatening condition they are facing.

To highlight the groundbreaking medical implications of Smith's legislation, Smith will hold a press conference with doctors, patients, and other lawmakers supportive of the legislation.

"Umbilical cords are a rich, non-controversial source of stem cells, but currently hospitals throw millions of them away each year because we do not have the infrastructure needed to properly collect and store them," said Smith who has been championing this legislation for three years. "The best kept medical secret has been that thousands have been successfully treated with cord blood stem cells for more than 67 diseases including Leukemia and Sickle Cell Anemia. The infusion of federal funds will make this medical miracle available to thousands more and will ensure that research continues so that this source of stem cells can treat many other debilitating diseases," Smith said.

"Published studies have shown that cord blood stem cells have the capacity to change into other cells types, which give them the potential to treat many other debilitating conditions such as spinal cord injury, Parkinson's, diabetes and heart disease," Smith said.

Additional Reading:

Kathryn Jean Lopez wrote about this bill at National Review Online here.
"Adult Stem Cell Research Bill Gains Momentum as House Vote Nears", LifeNews.com
"President Bush Prefers Adult Stem Cell Research Bill, Aide Says", LifeNews.com

House Leaders Agree to Vote on Relaxing Stem Cell Limits

From a WaPo piece:

The House leadership has agreed to allow a floor vote on a bill that would loosen the restrictions on human embryonic stem cell research imposed by President Bush in 2001, according to members of Congress and others privy to the arrangement.

The vote, expected to take place within the next two to three months, would be the first of its kind on the politically charged topic since Bush declared much of the research off-limits to federal funding. The cells show promise as treatments for many diseases but have stirred intense controversy because they are retrieved from human embryos, which are destroyed in the process.

Comments from Ramesh Ponnuru and Eric Pfeiffer

Though the president's policy on ESCR is unacceptable, this legislation which until now did not receive an up or down vote in the House, would be far worse. As Ramesh notes the president will likely veto it. Still, the House GOP leadership needs to hear from the pro-life community that their action here has not gone unnoticed.

BTW, the sponsor of the House bill is Rep Mike Castle, Republican of Delaware. He happens to be Catholic.

Another Catholic Governor Wants Millions for Embryonic Stem Cell Research

Governor Jim Doyle, wants to join fellow Catholic and governor, Arnold Schwarzenegger, and spend $750 Million for Embryonic Stem Cell Research in Wisconsin.

On the heels of California voters approving a $6 billion measure to finance unproven embryonic stem cell research, Wisconsin's governor wants the Badger State to spend $750 million on the controversial science. Governor Jim Doyle announced plans Wednesday to use a combination of public and private money to conduct research that would destroy human embryos to harvest their stem cells. That money would build on the nearly $1 billion the state has spent on medical research facilities over the last decade. "Other states, like California, are trying to play catch-up and build from scratch what we already have," he said. Some of the projects Doyle wants require legislative approval while others the governor can begin on his own through moving money in the state budget. The state's leading pro-life group said it will work feverishly to make sure the legislature does not approve taxpayer funding of research that destroys human life. "Wisconsin Right to Life supports the use of tax dollars for the use of ethical research which does not involve the creation and/or destruction of human life," said Barbara Lyons, Executive Director for Wisconsin Right to Life. "We will work with legislators to insure that Governor Doyle's proposal is amended to exclude unethical research."

I do not know much about Gov Doyle. I do know that Catholics in the diocese of Milwaukee have a wonderful shepard in Archbishop Dolan (I knew of him from the time I lived near St Louis) and are in need of leadership in La Crosse.

Let us pray for the four bishops in Wisconsin and all Catholics there as they battle the culture of death.