Senator Bill Frist
What’s the difference between an organ donor and a human embryo? The answer is life and death.
In fact, the difference between an organ donor and an embryo is radically significant, but apparently the Majority Leader of the Senate, Dr. Bill Frist who is himself a heart transplant surgeon, thinks they are basically the same thing. In his speech to the Senate Friday morning which called for more federal funding for embryonic stem cell research, he began by implying that using embryos for scientific research is the same thing as organ transplantation:
. . .when I remove the human heart from someone who is brain dead, and I place it in the chest of someone whose heart is failing to give them new life, I do so within an ethical construct that honors dignity of life and respect for the individual.
Like transplantation, if we can answer the moral and ethical questions about stem cell research, I believe we will have the opportunity to save many lives and make countless other lives more fulfilling.
There’s a big problem with this analogy: An organ donor is dead. An embryo is alive.
The strange thing is that Frist himself acknowledged this point. His statement on embryonic life is jaw-dropping:
Right now, to derive embryonic stem cells, an embryo — which many, including myself, consider nascent human life — must be destroyed.
Is it the adjective “nascent” that makes him believe it’s okay to destroy human life? Those are his very own words!
Then, as Senator Frist moved into discussing the specifics of the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act, he begins to sound positively Huxleyian — here’s a passage from Frist’s Brave New World:
Third, the bill doesn’t specify whether the patients or clinic staff or anyone else has the final say about whether an embryo will be implanted or will be discarded. [ed. — life or death] Obviously, any decision about the destiny of an embryo must clearly and ultimately rest with the parents.
The parents. Just ponder for a moment the use of this word. It is the right word to use. And oh, how sad.
Does Dr. Frist not understand how clearly he just articulated the so-called “pro-choice” agenda?
He certainly doesn’t want others to notice. He tried to paper it over:
I am pro-life. I believe human life begins at conception. It is at this moment that the organism is complete — yes, immature — but complete. An embryo is nascent human life. It’s genetically distinct. And it’s biologically human. It’s living.
But. He then follows with his call for expanding the research that requires the destruction of these living, “biologically human” “genetically distinct” embryos.
Senator Frist, that’s not pro-life. That’s “pro-life, but. . . ” There’s a big difference.
The difference is life, and death.
Has it got a finger? Has it got a toe?
Not quite yet, it’s an em-bry-o.
Soon it will be glad to meet us,
But for now it’s just a fetus.
And be sure to read her posting on What it’s like to live with [suicidal] depression.