Embryonic Stem Cell Research
Human beings, no matter how small, weak, or dependent, possess inherent dignity and intrinsic worth by virtue of their humanity. Thus the intentional harm or destruction of a human being for the supposed benefit of another human being is wrong.
This bedrock principle of traditional medical ethics was famously violated throughout the 20th century. Witness the gruesome "research" conducted on Jews and prisoners-of-war by the Nazis at Auschwitz and Dachau, the syphilis experiments performed on uninformed African Americans at the Tuskegee Institute in Alabama, and the intentional exposure of unwitting American servicemen to radiation during the 1940's. As Prof. James Burtchaell observed, the history of these experiments "shows well that when scientists and therapists set out to exploit one group to benefit another, it is invariably the disadvantaged who suffer for the powerful."
During the last decade, the same kind of reckless disregard for the intrinsic dignity of human life has characterized the practice of conducting experimentation on pre-born children. This experimentation takes two different but closely related forms:
1) Fetal Tissue Transplants: The transplant of tissue from dead unborn babies who have been aborted or live unborn babies who are about to be aborted into individuals who have incurable conditions or diseases.
2) Live Human Embryo Research: The creation or use of human life in the laboratory for harmful tests that involve destroying or discarding the live human embryo.
Of all human beings, pre-born human life is most vulnerable to abuse and exploitation. While Dayton Right to Life welcomes legitimate medical advances to alleviate suffering and cure disease, those advances must never result from the intentional death and destruction of unborn human beings.
As Do No Harm: The Coalition of Americans for Research Ethics (www.stemcellresearch.org) recently concluded its statement, On Human Embryos and Stem Cell Research,
"If anything can be gained from the cruel atrocities committed against human beings in the last century and a half, it is the lesson that the utilitarian devaluation of one group of human beings for the alleged benefit of others is a price we simply cannot afford to pay."
The foundation for this baseline principle of medical ethics comes from the Hippocratic Oath.
For more information click here.
Euthanasia
Euthanasia is the purposeful killing by act or omission of a dependent human being for his/her alleged benefit. Euthanasia has been advocated for certain classes of human beings, including the handicapped young, the mentally impaired, the terminally ill and the comatose. The inevitable result of this trend will be to escalate from killing for the alleged benefit of an individual to killing for the convenience of others.
Euthanasia violates the principle that each human being has intrinsic dignity and value, regardless of age, physical or mental condition, or state of dependency. Euthanasia seeks to improve the quality of life, not by mutually ennobling acts of care and assistance, but by exterminating those who fall below some arbitrary standard. Killing is never a proper expression of compassion.
We approve of the accepted medical practice of administering pain-relieving drugs in whatever dosage necessary to alleviate the suffering of the terminally ill, as long as there is no intent to bring about or hasten the patient's death. We care about human life and about people and families facing difficult medical decisions. We promote positive steps of advocacy to protect all human life, no matter what its situation on the continuum of life.
For more information click here.
Abstinence Education
Ohio's Abstinence Education Law: House Bill 189
Effective date March 18, 1999
This bill requires that venereal disease education emphasize abstinence from sexual activity as the only 100% effective protection against unwanted pregnancy and transmission of the AIDS virus and other sexually transmitted diseases.
It also mandates that the State Board of Education require course materials and instruction in venereal disease education to cover certain topics pertaining to abstinence and sexual activity outside of marriage. The bill requires the State Board of Education’s minimum standards to include course materials which teach that:
Title V Abstinence Education Definition
Section 912--Abstinence Education--of the Welfare Reform Act of 1996 amends Title V of the Social Security Act including:
SEPARATE PROGRAM FOR ABSTINENCE EDUCATION
Sec. 510. (b)( I ) The purpose of an allotment under subsection (a) to a State is to enable the State to provide abstinence education, and at the option of the State, where appropriate, mentoring, counseling, and adult supervision to promote abstinence from sexual activity, with a focus on those groups which are most likely to bear children out-of-wedlock.
(2) For purposes of this section, the terms ‘abstinence education’ means an educational or motivational program which--
(A) has as its exclusive purpose, teaching the social, psychological, and health gains to be realized by abstaining from sexual activity;
(B) teaches abstinence from sexual activity outside marriage as the expected standard for all school age children;
(C) teaches that abstinence from sexual activity is the only certain way to avoid out-of-wedlock pregnancy, sexually transmitted diseases, and other associated health problems;
(D) teaches that a mutually faithful monogamous relationship in context of marriage is the expected standard of human sexual activity;
(E) teaches that sexual activity outside of the context of marriage is likely to have harmful psychological and physical effects;
(F) teaches that bearing children out-of-wedlock is likely to have harmful consequences for the child, the child's parents, and society;
(G) teaches young people how to reject sexual advances and how alcohol and drug use increases vulnerability to sexual advances; and
(H) teaches the importance of attaining self-sufficiency before engaging in sexual activity.
More Information
|
