This is an archive of the old Stones Cry Out site. For the current site, click here.

« | Main | Evangelical First Things in Public Life: 12 Things We Should Expect of Evangelicals »

February 23, 2005

Sanctity of Life #1 Moral Issue Facing America

Greg over at "What Attitude Problem" passes along this list from Chuck Colson, outlining what Colson feels are the top ten moral issues facing America today. It should come as no surprise that Colson puts "Sanctity of Life" at #1. Colson doesn't limit this to mean only abortion, but defines this as "preserving sanctity of life by resisting the encroachment of abortion, euthanasia, cloning, and embryonic stem cell research."

One might also add: defending the disabled from those who seek their destruction. Terri Schiavo, for example. Stand in the Trenches is one of many blogs that has been following her story closely.

Today on his "Breakpoint" radio program, Chuck Colson highlights a sneaky bill going through the Washington State legislature that purports to outlaw human cloning. In fact, the bill doesn't do that at all. It merely outlaws bringing a cloned human to full term.

The bill] takes advantage of the public’s confusion about cloning to sell the moral equivalent of snake oil. To understand why this is the case, we need to understand cloning. It’s a process known as “somatic cell nuclear transfer,” or SCNT.

In SCNT, a “biotechnologist removes the nucleus from a mature human egg.” He replaces that nucleus with “nucleus of a body cell from [a] DNA donor. . . . A little shot of electricity comes next, and if all goes well, a new human cloned embryo comes into being.”

While all of this is much easier said than done, the important part is that “there is no more cloning to be done since a new human organism now exists.”

The Washington bill, like similar legislation in New Jersey, does nothing to prevent SCNT. All it would do is prohibit implanting the cloned embryo “with the purpose of producing a human being.” But since a human being has already been produced, when they use the words producing a human being, what the sponsors mean is bringing the cloned embryo to birth. Anything short of that is permissible under this bill.

You could clone human embryos and harvest stem cells, or you could grow fetuses for medical experiments, or let embryos gestate for nine months, abort them, and harvest the organs. Wesley Smith, writing in National Review] gives these moral horrors a fitting name: “fetal farming.” People in the state of Washington have been misled into thinking that the bill would prevent the advent of a “Brave New World.” Instead, as Smith says, it ushers it in.

In other news, the Supreme Court has agreed to hear the Bush Administration's challenge of Oregon's assisted-suicide law -- the only law of its kind in the country.

Oregon's Death With Dignity Act, the administration's target, was approved twice by the state's voters and took effect in November 1997. According to the state, in a brief filed last month, 171 patients have used the law to administer lethal doses of federally regulated drugs that their doctors prescribed for them. In the administration's view, suicide is not a "legitimate medical purpose" under regulations that carry out the federal Controlled Substances Act. Consequently, the administration will argue before the Supreme Court, as it did unsuccessfully in the lower federal courts, that doctors who prescribe drugs for committing suicide violate the federal law and are subject to revocation of their federal prescription license. The license applies to broad categories of medications and is necessary, as a practical matter, for a doctor to remain in practice.

Posted by Drew at February 23, 2005 09:25 PM

Trackback Pings

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Sanctity of Life #1 Moral Issue Facing America:

» The Soul of Oregon's Death With Dignity Act from BlueOregon
By Chris Edwards of Creswell, Oregon. Chris Edwards is the general manager of a forest products company and writes the blog Oregon Sunrise. Opponents of the Death With Dignity Act never call it by its formal name. To them, the [Read More]

Tracked on February 25, 2005 04:56 AM


I am not a Christian, but I came across your site whilst meandering about this early morning. You strike me as a reasonable, moderate, and fairly thoughtful person, based on most of what I've read herein.

That said, how can you possibly claim to support the sanctity of life -- touting it as the number one issue facing our nation -- without mentioning, for instance, the incredibly ANTIlife policies of our current Administration, which arguably has cast itself as among the most pro-Christian to date?

Certainly I am not claiming either political party occupies some sort of moral or ethical high-ground in this regard -- indeed, the US was founded in part upon what remains a disturbingly paradoxical premise: religious freedom (for some), coupled with

  • genocide

  • demonization of the "Other"

  • authoritarianism at home (and globally) whilst loudly and hypocritically crying "victim" when, lo and behold, such tendencies come home in the form of, say, armed resistance or sheer thuggery, or some combination thereof ('terrorism' when we are on the receiving end, 'justice' or 'democracy' or 'preserving our values' when we are the perpetrators),

I mean, state murder (the death penalty, 'collateral damage') or torture (Abu Ghraib, 'extrajudicial rendition') is just that; state indifference to the needs of human beings regardless of origin/creed/race/religion/worldview is completely anti-Christian, inasmuch as I construe the fundamental message of Christ.

I have respect for your religious beliefs, however, I encourage you and your readers and those who share similar beliefs as yourself to consider just how hollow a call for a culture of life is when it is seemingly motivated by ideology alone, and fails to take into account ACTUAL, ONGOING and largely systemic and institutional indifference to suffering, and creation of misery and death, on a global scale.

I tend to find that those who trumpet their righteousness the most are precisely those least acquainted with what it truly would mean to live in accordance with those beliefs.

It is truly high time for a shared culture that embraces even a -very small subset- of what Christ taught. Cloning, euthanasia and abortion are issues with myriad ethical implications, but simply refraining from all of them (even if such a thing were possible) would not even begin to approach a truly life affirming culture while the collective hands of the indifferent, the ignorant and the directly implicated remain able to impose their own profoundly pro-death culture on both a national and global scale.

Posted by: ajs at August 31, 2005 10:38 AM