|
Home
The Wrong Legacy
A Cause Reagan Wouldn’t Have
Supported
BreakPoint with
Charles Colson
June 16,
2004
The late, revered President Ronald Reagan is being
enlisted in an all-out campaign to lift President Bush’s
restrictions on embryonic stem-cell research. Even before President
Reagan died on June 5, fifty-eight
U.S. senators signed a letter asking President Bush to
remove those restrictions. Now many of those senators, from Democrat
Dianne Feinstein (Calif.)
to Republican Orrin Hatch (Utah),
are pointing to Reagan’s long illness and death as the perfect
justification for why such research is needed.
But embryonic stem-cell research requires creating
a human embryo and killing it. As President Bush recognizes, this raises
profound moral objections. And what the embryonic research advocates are
forgetting is that President Reagan strongly agreed with President
Bush.
New York Times columnist William Safire,
while invoking Reagan’s name to promote the cause of embryonic
stem-cell research, writes that Reagan’s views on this will never
be known. Well, that’s not so. A former White House assistant has
given me a copy of a draft executive order that Reagan was working on
shortly before he left office. The order would have “continue[d]
and broaden[ed] the moratorium on NIH grants for certain types of fetal
experimentation,” a moratorium put into effect in 1988 by an
assistant secretary in the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare.
Reagan took a clear stand against research that would harm or destroy
“any living child in utero,” in all stages of development in
which scientists were then able to experiment on them.
And as Reagan’s national security adviser
and close personal friend William Clark pointed out in the New York
Times, “After the charter expired for the Departments of
Health, Education and Welfare’s ethical advisory board—which
in the 1970s supported destructive research on human embryos—he
[that is, Reagan] began a de facto ban on federal financing of embryo
research that he held to throughout his presidency.”
Clark knew his friend’s mind on this subject
very well. “In his famous ‘Evil Empire’ speech of
March 1983—which most recall as solely an indictment of the Soviet
Union—Ronald Reagan spoke strongly against the denigration of
innocent human life,” writes Clark. “And [Reagan] favored
bills in Congress that would have given every human being—at all
stages of development—protection as a person under the
14th Amendment.” Reagan also favored a Human Life
Amendment which defines life as beginning at conception.
In addition, Clark points out, Reagan “would
have asked the marketplace question: If human embryonic research is so
clearly promising as the researchers assert, why aren’t private
investors putting [their] money into it, as they are in adult stem-cell
research?” The answer is obvious: Embryonic research is not only
far less ethical than adult stem-cell research, but it’s also far
less promising. Score another one for the Gipper.
It’s certainly understandable that Nancy
Reagan, after the terrible ordeal she’s been through, might look
with favor on any possibility of defeating Alzheimer’s. It’s
even understandable that others, misled by extravagant promises and
blind to what’s really going on, are grasping at the same straw.
But they ought to argue their case on its merits—what few merits
it has—and not enlist in their cause the name of Ronald Reagan,
who stood foursquare against the exploitation and destruction of human
life in any stage. That is one legacy he would have never wanted
to leave.
For further reading and
information:
William Clark, “For Reagan, All Life Was Sacred,” New York Times, 11 June 2004. Free
registration required.
Read President Reagan’s March 1983
“Evil Empire”
speech.
Rick Weiss, “Stem Cells An Unlikely Therapy for
Alzheimer’s,” Washington
Post, 10 June 2003, A03.
Shankar Vedantam, “Reagans’ Experience Alters Outlook for
Alzheimer’s Patients,”
Washington Post, 14 June 2004, A01.
Pippa Wysong, “Bone marrow cells may heal brain: Alzheimer’s,
Parkinson’s patients could become their own donors,” Medical Post, 25 May 2004.
Sue Pleming, “Laura Bush Says Cannot Support Stem Cell
Research,” Reuters, 9 June
2004.
James Gordon Meek, “Gloves off in Reagan stem war,” New York Daily News, 14 June
2004.
Wesley J. Smith, “Cell Wars,” National
Review Online, 8 June 2004.
Associated Press, “Senators press for stem-cell research,” Washington Times, 8 June 2004.
Christopher Smith, “Hatch urges Bush to back stem cell research,” Salt Lake Tribune, 8 June 2004.
Ronald Reagan, “Abortion and the Conscience of a Nation,” Human Life Review, originally published in
1983, reprinted in 1984.
William Safire, “Reagan’s Next Victory,” New York Times, 7 June 2004 (reprinted by
the Houston Chronicle).
Eric Cohen, “Stem Cells and the Senate,” National Review, 25 May 2004. (Dozens of
U.S. Senators have signed a letter to President Bush,
demanding that he change the policy in place since 2001 regulating
the federal funding of embryonic stem-cell research. Ethics and Public
Policy Center scholar and New Atlantis editor Eric Cohen
explains how the advocates of such research have been distorting
the facts and why the key questions are fundamentally
ethical.)
The Editors of The New Atlantis,
“Do Embryos Vote?,”
The New Atlantis, Number 4, Winter 2004, 98-101.
Sheryl Gay Stolberg, “Reaganite by Association? His Family Won’t Allow
It,” New York Times, 15 June
2004. Free registration required.
BreakPointCommentary No. 040608, “The Question of Good and Evil: The Legacy of Ronald
Reagan.”
Leslie
Carbone, “Mourning in America,” BreakPoint Online, 11 June 2004.
Lisa Barrett Mann, “An Embryonic Approach,”
Washington Post, 6 April 2004, HE01.
Dr. David A. Prentice, Stem Cells and
Cloning (Benjamin-Cummings, 2002). An introduction to this
controversial research. Call 1-877-322-5527 to order.
|