I am relieved that Senate Bill 74, which would have repealed our state laws prohibiting embryonic stem cell research, was recently defeated by the South Dakota Senate. I have addressed this issue on several occasions. However, it is an opportune time for me to once again bring to light both the facts and the moral implications of embryonic stem cell research. Clarity of thought and candor are still needed, lest modern science be misused, as it was in the last century by those who experimented on human beings.

    My full statement on embryonic stem cell research is posted on the home page of the diocesan website at www.rapid citydiocese.org. However, I want to address two falsehoods that were used to promote Senate Bill 74.

    The first deception is that we should not be too concerned about human embryos, after all “aren’t they just a microscopic clump of cells?” This description of an embryo is an obvious attempt to distract from one simple truth accepted by all scientists: human embryos are genetically complete, unique in their makeup and fully human. Each one of us was this tiny microscopic size once, just as each of us was a child in the womb, a newborn infant, a toddler, a teen. This is why the Church insists that “research” on human embryos involves “the killing of innocent human creatures,” and is without question “an absolutely unacceptable act” (cf., The Gospel of Life, 63). No reference to the size of embryos can cloud the fact that destroying them involves killing unique human life that is genetically complete.

    The second falsehood is that embryonic stem cells are of greater benefit to researchers than adult stem cells. The truth is that embryonic stem cells have yet to provide a cure for anything. In fact, not only have embryonic stem cells never helped a human patient, recent studies show they can put a patient at risk. In contrast, scientists continue to discover the proven benefits of adult stem cells, for example, in the treatment of diabetes.

    And, in 2007, the respected journals, Science and Cell, independently reported breakthroughs that could benefit science and ensure that adult stem cell research is morally acceptable. Separate teams of scientists in Wisconsin and Japan, headed by James Thomson and Shinya Yamanaka, respectively, succeeded in reprogramming human skin cells so that they behave like the embryonic stem cells. Both lead scientists spoke about the need to resolve the ethical concerns surrounding the use of embryonic stem cells as an important factor in motivating them to pursue the study of adult stem cells. Thomson remarked that, “If human embryonic stem cell research does not make you at least a little bit uncomfortable, you have not thought about it enough.” Yamanaka spoke in more personal terms: “When I saw the embryo, I suddenly realized there was such a small difference between it and my daughters. I thought, we can’t keep destroying embryos for our research. There must be another way.”

    All of these developments show that there is no conflict between good science and good morality. The scientific and technological breakthroughs in stem cell research, through the use of adult stem cells, are exciting opportunities that will benefit millions of our citizens.
People of faith recognize that science has contributed mightily to our sense of wonder and human advancement. We also share society’s concern for the many families, faced with serious illness, who are desperate for cures for their loved ones.

    Tragically, however, these families and the public are often misled into thinking that research on human embryos provides the only hope for a cure. Researchers and for-profit biomedical companies overstate the benefits of embryonic stem cell research and other proponents regularly disregard the moral implications involved in it.

    We can be proud that the South Dakota Senate upheld the state law prohibiting embryonic stem cell research in our state while still allowing for ethical research on adult stem cells. Our state law is one of the strongest in the country and is based on good science and good morality. Those elected representatives who voted to continue the ban on embryonic stem cell research in our state are to be commended for ushering in a new age of medical progress by supporting morally responsible research.