1 Emphases are added throughout in order to help those unfamiliar with the science. Full references for many of the human embryology and human molecular texts used in this article include: Ronan O'Rahilly and Fabiola Muller, Human Embryology & Teratology (New York: Wiley-Liss, 2001) [Note: O'Rahilly is one of the originators of The Carnegie Stages of Early Human Embryological Development, and has sat on the International Nomina Embryologica Committee for decades]; Bruce M. Carlson, Human Embryology and Developmental Biology (St. Louis, MO: Mosby, 1999); William Larsen, Human Embryology (2nd ed.) (New York: Churchill Livingstone, 1997); also, Larsen, Essentials of Human Embryology (New York: Churchill Livingstone, 1998); Keith Moore and T. V. N. Persaud, The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology (6th ed. only) (Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders Company, 1998); also, (7th ed., 2003); Tom Strachan and Andrew P. Read, Human Molecular Genetics 2 (2nd ed.) (New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1999); and, Benjamin Lewin, Genes VII (New York: Oxford University Press, 2000). [Back]
2 See, for example, Jo Mannies and Bill Bell, Jr., "Fearing a Broad Ban, Washington U. Opposes State Anti-Cloning Legislation", St. Louis Post-Dispatch, May 16, 2003; Steven L. Teitelbaum, M.D., Editorial, "Bioethics" (Therapeutic cloning is designed to help people, not create new ones), St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Monday, December 3, 2001; Ted Agres, "Cloning Crackdown? Congress expected to revive anti-cloning legislation in light of clone-baby claims", The Scientist, January 3, 2003, at: Ted Ares, "House passes anti-cloning measure; Bill would criminalize research using human SCNT", The Scientist, Feb. 28, 2003, at: >; Press Release, Washington University at St. Louis School of Medicine, "Missourians Speak Out For Therapeutic Cloning", Thursday, May 30, 2002; Tina Hesman, "Danforth, Eagleton favor cloning cells for research", The Post-Dispatch, May 31, 2002; Press Release, Washington Update: FASEB Activities on Cloning Issue, June 2002, "FASEB Opposes Reproductive Human Cloning, But Urges Senate Not to Criminalize Biomedical Research". [Back]
3 See, e.g., Pontifical Council for Culture, and Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue, "Jesus Christ: The Bearer of the Water of Life; A Christian reflection on the ÔNew Age'", in L'Osservatore Romano, Aug. 13-20, 2003, at: http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/interelg/documents/rc_pc_interelg_doc_20030203_new-age_en.html#3 NEW AGE AND CHRISTIAN SPIRITUALITY; Fr. Alfonso Auilar, "Gnosticism and the Struggle for the World's Soul", Parts I and II, National Catholic Register, April 6-12, 2003, at: http://www.ncregister.com/Register_News/040603gnostic1.htm. [Back]
4 See Vatican's Mission to the United Nations, U. N. Speech by Archbishop Martino, Consequences Would Desecrate the Future of Humankind (Nov. 21, 2001), (Zenit) [Back]
5 Josef Pieper, Abuse of Language - Abuse of Power (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1992). [Back]
7 Pieper, ibid., pp. 18-20. [Back]
8 Ronan O'Rahilly and Fabiola Muller, Human Embryology & Teratology (New York: Wiley-Liss, 2001), p. ix. [Back]
9 For an extensive treatment of the erroneous science involved in this question, see Irving, "When does a human being begin? 'Scientific' myths and scientific facts", International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 1999, 19:3/4:22-47, also at: http://www.lifeissues.net/writers/irv/irv_01lifebegin1.html; Irving, "'New age' embryology text books: 'Pre-embryo', 'pregnancy' and abortion counseling: Implications for fetal research", Linacre Quarterly May 1994, 61(2):42-62. [Back]
10 Thomas Aquinas, De Ente Et Essentia, from Aristotle, De Coelo. [Back]
11 O'Rahilly and Muller (2001): "Gametogenesis is the production of germ cells (gametes), i.e., spermatozoa and oocytes. ... The gametes are believed to arise by successive divisions from a distinct line of cells (the germ plasm), and the cells that are not directly concerned with gametogenesis are termed somatic. ... The 46 chromosomes consist of 44 autosomes and two sex chromosomes: X and Y. In the male the sex chromosomes are XY; in the female they are XX. Phenotypic sex is normally determined by the presence or absence of a Y chromosome. ... During the differentiation of gametes, diploid cells are termed primary, and haploid cells are celled secondary, e.g., secondary oocytes. Diploid refers to the presence of two sets of homologous chromosomes: 23 pairs, making a total of 46. This is characteristic of somatic and primordial germ cells alike. Haploid is used for a single set of 23 chromosomes, as in gametes." (p. 19); Strachan and Read (1999): "A subset of the diploid body cells constitute the germ line. These give rise to specialized diploid cells in the ovary and testis that can divide by meiosis to produce haploid gametes (sperm and egg). ... The other cells of the body, apart from the term line, are known as somatic cells. ... most somatic cells are diploid ... ." (p. 28); Moore and Persaud (1998): "Meiosis is a special type of cell division that involves two meiotic cell divisions; it take place in germ cells only. Diploid germ cells give rise to haploid gametes (sperms and oocytes)." (p. 18); Carlson (1999): "In a mitotic division, each germ cell produces two diploid progeny that are genetically equal." (p. 2); Larsen (1998): "Like all normal somatic (i.e., non-germ cells), the primordial germ cells contain 23 pairs of chromosomes, or a total of 46." (p. 4). [Back]
12 O'Rahilly and Muller (2001): "Future somatic cells thereby lose their totipotency and are liable to senscence, whereas germ cells regain their totipotency after meiosis and fertilization." (p. 39); Strachan and Read (1999): "Early primordial germ cells are spared; their genomic DNA remains very largely unmethylated until after gonadal differentiation and as the germ cells develop whereupon widespread de novo methylation occurs." (p. 191); See also notes below for an explanation of the process of "regulation" that is involved in "twinning", i.e., when separated totiptent cells, such as human primitive germ line cells and the cells if the inner cell mass of the blastocyst , are involved. Generally speaking, any cell - somatic or germ line -- that is diploid can be cloned by means of using a nuclear transfer cloning technique. Any cell - somatic or germ line -- that is totipotent can be cloned by means of using a "twinning" cloning technique. [Back]
13 O'Rahilly and Muller (2001): "During the differentiation of gametes, diploid cells are termed primary, and haploid cells are called secondary, e.g., secondary oocytes. Diploid refers to the presence of two sets of homologous chromosomes: 23 pairs, making a total of 46. This is characteristic of somatic and primordial germ cells alike. Haploid is used for a single set of 23 chromosomes, as in gametes." (p. 19); Strachan and Read (1999): "A subset of the diploid body cells constitute the germ line. These give rise to specialized diploid cells in the ovary and testis that can divide by meiosis to produce haploid gametes (sperm and egg). ... The other cells of the body, apart from the term line, are known as somatic cells. ... most somatic cells are diploid ... ." (p. 28); Moore and Persaud (1998): "Meiosis is a special type of cell division that involves two meiotic cell divisions; it take place in germ cells only. Diploid germ cells give rise to haploid gametes (sperms and oocytes)." (p. 18); Carlson (1999): "In a mitotic division, each germ cell produces two diploid progeny that are genetically equal." (p. 2); Larsen (1998): "Like all normal somatic (i.e., non-germ cells), the primordial germ cells contain 23 pairs of chromosomes, or a total of 46." (p. 4). [Back]
14 Wilhelm His, Anatomie menschlicher Embryonen (Leipzig: Vogel, 1880-1885); O'Rahilly and Muller 1994, p. 3; Keith L. Moore and T.V.N. Persaud, The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology (use 6th ed. only) (Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders Company, 1998), p. 12. [Back]
15 E.g., as determined in extensive numbers of transgenic mice experiments as in Kollias et al, "The human beta-gobulin gene contains downstream developmental specific enhancer," Nucleic Acids Research 15(14) (July 1987), pp. 5739-47; also similar work by, e.g., R. K. Humphries, A. Schnieke. [Back]
16 Moore and Persaud (1998): "Sutton and Boveri declared independently in 1902 that the behavior of chromosomes during germ cell formation and fertilization agreed with Mendel's principles of inheritance. In the same year, Garrod reported alcaptonuria as the first example of mendelian inheritance in human beings. Many consider Garrod to be the Father of Medical Genetics. It was soon realized that the zygote contains all the genetic information necessary for directing the development of a new human being. (p. 12); see also, Holtzer et al., "Induction-dependent and lineage-dependent models for cell-diversification are mutually exclusive," Progress in Clinical Biological Research 175:3-11 (1985); also similar work by, e.g., F. Mavilio, C. Hart. [Back]
17 Larsen, pp. 19, 33, 49. [Back]
18 See, e.g., Richard McCormick, S.J., "Who or what is the preembryo?", Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 1:1 (1991). In this paper McCormick draws heavily on the work of frog embryologist Clifford Grobstein, as well as from "an unpublished study of a research group of the Catholic Health Association entitled 'The Status and Use of the Human Preembryo', (p. 14).
The influence of the McCormick/Grobstein term "pre-embryo" was (and still is) widespread even among Catholic scholars. In addition to the works of McCormick and Grobstein, see acceptance of the term "pre-embryo" also in: Andre E. Hellegers, "Fetal development," in Thomas A. Mappes and Jane S. Zembatty (eds.), Biomedical Ethics, (New York: Macmillan, 1981); Hellegers, "Fetal development", Theological Studies (1970), 31:3-9; Charles E. Curran, "Abortion: Contemporary debate in philosophical and religious ethics", in W. T. Reich (ed.), Encyclopedia of Bioethics 1 (London: The Free Press, 1978), pp. 17-26; Kevin Wildes, "Book Review: Human Life: Its Beginning and Development" (L'Harmattan, Paris: International Federation of Catholic Universities, 1988); Carlos Bedate and Robert Cefalo, "The zygote: To be or not be a person", Journal of Medicine and Philosophy (1989), 14:6:641; Robert C. Cefalo, "Book Review: Embryo Experimentation, Peter Singer et al (eds.); 'Eggs, embryos and ethics'", Hastings Center Report (1991), 21:5:41; Mario Moussa and Thomas A. Shannon, "The search for the new pineal gland: Brain life and personhood", The Hastings Center Report (1992), 22:3:30-37; Carol Tauer, The Moral Status of the Prenatal Human (Doctoral Dissertation in Philosophy; Kennedy Institute of Ethics, Georgetown University, Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University, 1981) (Sister Tauer's dissertation mentor was Richard McCormick; she later went on to become the ethics co-chair of the NIH Human Embryo Research Panel 1994); C. Tauer, "The tradition of probabilism and the moral status of the early embryo", in Patricia B. Jung and Thomas A. Shannon, Abortion and Catholicism (New York: Crossroad, 1988), pp. 54-84; Lisa S. Cahill, "Abortion, autonomy, and community", in Jung and Shannon, Abortion and Catholicism (1988), pp. 85-98; Joseph F. Donceel, "A liberal Catholic's view", in Jung and Shannon, Abortion and Catholicism (1988), pp. 48-53; H. Tristram Engelhardt, The Foundations of Bioethics (New York: Oxford University Press, 1985), p. 111; William A. Wallace, "Nature and human nature as the norm in medical ethics", in Edmund D. Pellegrino, John P. Langan and John Collins Harvey (eds.), Catholic Perspectives on Medical Morals (Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishing, 1989), pp. 23-53; Norman Ford, When Did I Begin? (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1988), p. 298; Antoine Suarez, "Hydatidiform moles and teratomas confirm the human identity of the preimplantation embryo", Journal of Medicine and Philosophy (1990), 15:627-635; Thomas J. Bole, III, "Metaphysical accounts of the zygote as a person and the veto power of facts", Journal of Medicine and Philosophy (1989), 14:647-653; Bole, "Zygotes, souls, substances, and persons", Journal of Medicine and Philosophy (1990), 15:637-652.
See also: See Richard McCormick's testimony in The National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research; Report and Recommendations; Research on the Fetus; U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, 1975, pp. 34-35; McCormick, How Brave a New World? (Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press), p. 76; McCormick, "Proxy consent in the experimentation situation", Perspectives in Biology and Medicine (1974), 18:2-20; Paul Ramsey's testimony in The National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research; Report and Recommendations; Research on the Fetus; U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, 1975, pp. 35-36.
The use of the term "pre-embryo" has been quite widespread for decades -- nationally and internationally. In addition to the Catholic scholars who accepted the use of the term "pre-embryo" as noted above, a partial list of secular bioethics writers who also accepted the use of the term in these debates includes: Paul Ramsey, "Reference points in deciding about abortion" in J.T. Noonan (ed.), The Morality of Abortion (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1970), pp. 60-100, esp. p. 75; John Robertson, "Extracorporeal embryos and the abortion debate", Journal of Contemporary Health Law and Policy (1986), 2;53;53-70; Robertson, "Symbolic issues in embryo research", The Hastings Center Report (1995, Jan./Feb.), 37-38; Robertson, "The case of the switched embryos", The Hastings Center Report (1995), 25:6:13-24; Howard W. Jones, "And just what is a preembryo?", Fertility and Sterility 52:189-91; Jones and C. Schroder, "The process of human fertilization: Implications for moral status", Fertility and Sterility (August 1987), 48:2:192; Clifford Grobstein, "The early development of human embryos", Journal of Medicine and Philosophy (1985), 10:213-236; also, Science and the Unborn (New York: Basic Books, 1988), p. 61; Michael Tooley, "Abortion and infanticide", in The Rights and Wrongs of Abortion, M. Cohen et al (eds.) (New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1974), pp. 59 and 64; Peter Singer and Helga Kuhse, "The ethics of embryo research", Law, Medicine and Health Care (1987),14:13-14; Kuhse and Singer, "For sometimes letting - and helping - die", Law, Medicine and Health Care (1986), 3:40:149-153; Kuhse and Singer, Should The Baby Live? The Problem of Handicapped Infants (Oxford University Press, 1985), p.138; Singer, "Taking life: Abortion", in Practical Ethics (London: Cambridge University Press, 1981), pp. 122-123; Peter Singer, Helga Kuhse, Stephen Buckle, Karen Dawson, Pascal Kasimba (eds.), Embryo Experimentation (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1990); R.M. Hare, "When does potentiality count? A comment on Lockwood," Bioethics (1988), 2:3:214; Michael Lockwood, "When does life begin?", in Michael Lockwood (ed.), Moral Dilemma's in Modern Medicine (New York: Oxford University Press, 1985), p. 10; Hans-Martin Sass, "Brain life and brain death: A proposal for normative agreement," Journal of Medicine and Philosophy (1989), 14:45-59; Michael Lockwood, "Warnock versus Powell (and Harradine): When does potentiality count?" Bioethics (1988), 2:3:187213.
See also the use of the term "pre-embryo" in many national and international documents (a small sample): Ethics Advisory Board (1979) Report and Conclusions: HEW Support of Research Involving Human In Vitro Fertilization and Embryo Transfer, Washington, D.C.: United States Department of Health, Education and Welfare, p. 101; National Institutes of Health Human Embryo Research Panel Meetings (Washington, D.C.: NIH, 1994), Feb. 2 meeting, pp. 27, 31, 50-80, 85-87, 104-106; in the Feb. 3, 1994 meeting, pp. 6-55; April 11 meeting, pp. 23-41, 9-22. See also, Dame Mary Warnock, Report of the Committee of Inquiry into Human Fertilization and Embryology, (London: Her Majesty's Stationary Office, 1984), pp. 27 and 63; British House of Lords, "Human Fertilisation and Embryology (Research Purposes) Regulations 2001"; Commonwealth of Australia, Select Senate Committee on the Human Embryo Experimentation Bill, (Canberra, Australia: Official Hansard Report, Commonwealth Government Printer, 1986); Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, On the Use of Human Embryos and Foetuses for Diagnostic, Therapeutic, Scientific, Industrial and Commercial Purposes, Recommendation 1046, 1986; and On the Use of Human Embryos and Foetuses in Scientific Research, Recommendation 1000, 1989; Ethics Committee of the American Fertility Society (AFS), "Ethical Considerations of the New Reproductive Technologies", Fertility and Sterility (1986), 46:27S. See also Jonsen, esp. Chapters 4 and 12. [Back]
19 See Irving, Philosophical and Scientific Analysis of the Nature of the Early Human Embryo (Doctoral dissertation, Georgetown University, Washington, D.C., 1991); Kischer, C. Ward and Dianne N. Irving. The Human Development Hoax: Time To Tell The Truth! (Clinton Township, MI: Gold Leaf Press, 1995 and extensively revised and expanded second edition by co-authors (1997); Irving, "'New age' embryology text books: 'Pre-embryo', 'pregnancy' and abortion counseling: Implications for fetal research", Linacre Quarterly May 1994, 61(2):42-62; Irving, "Scientific and philosophical expertise: An evaluation of the arguments on Ôpersonhood'", Linacre Quarterly February 1993, 60:1:18-46; Irving, "'New age' embryology text books: 'Pre-embryo', 'pregnancy' and abortion counseling: Implications for fetal research", Linacre Quarterly May 1994, 61(2):42-62. Most of these articles by Irving are on-line at: , and at . See also C. Ward Kischer: "The corruption of the science of Human Embryology", at: http://www.lifeissues.net/writers/kisc/kisc_01humanembryology.html; Kischer, "There is no such thing as a pre-embryo", at: http://www.lifeissues.net/writers/kisc/kisc_05nopreembryo.html; Kischer, : "When Does Human Life Begin? The Final Answer -- A human embryologist speaks out about socio-legal issues involving the human embryo", at: http://www.lifeissues.net/writers/kisc/kisc_04whenlifebegins1.html. [Back]
20 "[O]ther events are possible after this time [segmentation -- 14 days] which indicate that the notion of "irreversible individuality" may need some review if it is to be considered as an important criterion in human life coming "to be the individual human being it is ever thereafter to be". There are two conditions which raise questions about the adequacy of this notion: conjoined twins, sometimes known as Siamese twins, and fetus-in-fetu. ... Although conjoined twins and fetus-in-fetu have rarely been documented, the possibility of their occurring raises several points related to the notion of irreversible individuality. Conjoined twins arise from the twinning process occurring after the primitive streak has begun to form, that is, beyond 14 days after fertilization, or, in terms of the argument from segmentation, beyond the time at which irreversible individuality is said to exist. ... Similar reasoning leads to the same confusion in the case of fetus-in-fetu. ... One case recorded and studied in detail showed that the engulfed twin had developed to the equivalent of four months gestation and consisted of brain, bones, nerve tissue, muscle and some rudimentary organs. Microscopic study showed that engulfment had occurred at about four weeks after fertilization, in terms of the argument for segmentation long after the time when it is claimed that individuality is resolved." [Her reference is: Yasuda, Y., Mitomori, T., Matsurra, A. and Tanimura, T., "Fetus-in-fetu: report of a case", Teratology 31 (1985), 337-41.] [Karen Dawson, "Segmentation and moral status", in Peter Singer, Helga Kuhse, Stephen Buckle, Karen Dawson, and Pascal Kasimba, Embryo Experimentation (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1990), pp. 57-59].
See also Moore and Persaud, 1998: "Late division of early embryonic cells, such as division of the embryonic disc during the second week, results in MZ twins that are in one amniotic sac and one chorionic sac." (p. 159); " ... If the embryonic disk does not divide completely, or adjacent embryonic discs fuse, various types of conjoined MZ twins may form. ... the incidence of conjoined (Siamese) twins is 1 in 50,000- 100,000 births." (p. 161) "... Partial duplication at an early stage and attempted duplication from 2 weeks onward (when bilateral symmetry has become manifest) would result in conjoined twins." (p. 30); O'Rahilly and Muller, 1994: "Once the primitive streak has appeared at about 13 days, splitting that involves the longitudinal axis of the embryo would be incomplete and would result in conjoined twins." (p. 30); O'Rahilly and Muller, 2001: "Similarly, after the appearance of the primitive streak and notochordal process, any attempt at longitudinal division would be incomplete and would result in conjoined [Siamese] twins. " (p. 55) [Back]
21 Michael Kinsley, "Reason, faith and stem cells", Washington Post, Aug. 29, 2000, and also "Faith crucial in stem cell research", The Daily Yomiuri (Japan), Sept.5, 2000. [Back]
22 O'Rahilly and Muller, 2001: "Cells differentiate by the switching off of large portions of their genome." (p. 39); Lewin, 2000: "Gene expression is associated with demethylation. Methylation of DNA is one of the parameters that controls transcription. This is one of several regulatory events that influence the activity of a promoter; like the other regulatory events, typically this will apply to both copies of the gene." (p. 678; also p. 603 ff); Strachan and Read, 1999: "Gene regulation as the primary function for DNA methylation; DNA methylation in vertebrates has been viewed as a mechanism for silencing transcription and may constitute a default position." (pp. 193 ff) [Back]
23 Lewin, 2000: "The expression of genes is determined by a regulatory network that probably takes the form of a cascade. Expression of the first set of genes at the start of embryonic development leads to expression of the genes involved in the next stage of development, which in turn leads to a further stage, and so on until all the tissues of the adult are functioning." (p. 63; also pp. 914, 950) [Back]
24 See Irving, "Testimony Before the U.S. House of Representatives' Hearing on Cloning: Legal, Medical, Ethical and Social Issues", Linacre Quarterly May 1999, 66:2:26-40. [Back]
25 Strachan and Read, pp. 508-509. Even proponents of human cloning research admit that the immediate product of cloning is a new living human embryo, a human being. See, for example: Ian Wilmut: "The majority of reconstructed embryos were cultured in ligated oviducts of sheep... Most embryos that developed to morula or blastocyst after 6 days of culture were transferred to recipients and allowed to develop to term," etc. [I. Wilmut et al., "Viable offspring derived from fetal and adult mammalian cells," 385 Nature 810-813 (Feb. 27, 1997)], and also, "One potential use for this technique would be to take cells -- skin cells, for example -- from a human patient who had a genetic disease... You take these and get them back to the beginning of their life by nuclear transfer into an oocyte to produce a new embryo. From that new embryo, you would be able to obtain relatively simple, undifferentiated cells, which would retain the ability to colonize the tissues of the patient." - Ian Wilmut, in 7 Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 138 (Spring 1988).
On being asked in an interview: "Do you think that society should allow cloning of human embryos because of the great promise of medical benefit?"]: "Yes. Cloning at the embryo stage -- to achieve cell dedifferentiation -- could provide benefits that are wide ranging..." - Keith Campbell, head of embryology at PPL Therapeutics and co-author of Dr. Wilmut's landmark paper, in 7 Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 139 (Spring 1988).
Lee M. Silver, professor of molecular biology and evolutionary biology at Princeton University, "Yet there is nothing synthetic about the cells used in cloning... The newly created embryo can only develop inside the womb of a woman in the same way that all embryos and fetuses develop. Cloned children will be full-fledged human beings, indistinguishable in biological terms from all other members of the species. Thus, the notion of a soulless clone has no basis in reality.", in Remaking Eden: Cloning and Beyond in a Brave New World (Avon Books 1997), p. 107.
"This experiment [producing Dolly] demonstrated that, when appropriately manipulated and placed in the correct environment, the genetic material of somatic cells can regain its full potential to direct embryonic, fetal, and subsequent development." - National Institutes of Health, Background Paper: Cloning: Present uses and Promises, Jan. 29, 1998, p. 3.
"The Commission began its discussions fully recognizing that any effort in humans to transfer a somatic cell nucleus into an enucleated egg involves the creation of an embryo, with the apparent potential to be implanted in utero and developed to term." - Cloning Human Beings: Report and Recommendations of the National Bioethics Advisory Commission (Rockville, MD: June 1997), p. 3.
[Expressing disbelief that some deny that human cloning produces an embryo]: "If it's not an embryo, what is it?" - Jonathan Van Blerkom, human embryologist at University of Colorado, in American Medical News, Feb. 23, 1998, p. 32 (Dr. Van Blerkom said researchers' efforts to avoid the word "embryo" in this context are "self-serving.") [Back]
26 See, for example: Ian Wilmut: "The majority of reconstructed embryos were cultured in ligated oviducts of sheep... Most embryos that developed to morula or blastocyst after 6 days of culture were transferred to recipients and allowed to develop to term," etc. [I. Wilmut et al., "Viable offspring derived from fetal and adult mammalian cells," 385 Nature 810-813 (Feb. 27, 1997)], and also, "One potential use for this technique would be to take cells -- skin cells, for example -- from a human patient who had a genetic disease... You take these and get them back to the beginning of their life by nuclear transfer into an oocyte to produce a new embryo. From that new embryo, you would be able to obtain relatively simple, undifferentiated cells, which would retain the ability to colonize the tissues of the patient." - Ian Wilmut, in 7 Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 138 (Spring 1988).
Lee M. Silver, professor of molecular biology and evolutionary biology at Princeton University, "Yet there is nothing synthetic about the cells used in cloning... The newly created embryo can only develop inside the womb of a woman in the same way that all embryos and fetuses develop. Cloned children will be full-fledged human beings, indistinguishable in biological terms from all other members of the species. Thus, the notion of a soulless clone has no basis in reality.", in Remaking Eden: Cloning and Beyond in a Brave New World (Avon Books 1997), p. 107.
"This experiment [producing Dolly] demonstrated that, when appropriately manipulated and placed in the correct environment, the genetic material of somatic cells can regain its full potential to direct embryonic, fetal, and subsequent development." - National Institutes of Health, Background Paper: Cloning: Present uses and Promises, Jan. 29, 1998, p. 3.
"The Commission began its discussions fully recognizing that any effort in humans to transfer a somatic cell nucleus into an enucleated egg involves the creation of an embryo, with the apparent potential to be implanted in utero and developed to term." - Cloning Human Beings: Report and Recommendations of the National Bioethics Advisory Commission (Rockville, MD: June 1997), p. 3. [Back]
27 Jonathan Van Blerkom, in American Medical News, Feb. 23, 1998, p. 32. [Back]
28 The human genome is not defined in terms of the nuclear genes alone, but in terms of the total DNA in the cell, including DNA found outside of the nucleus in the cytoplasm. Strachan and Read (1999): "The human genome is the term used to describe the total genetic information (DNA content) in human cells. It really comprises two genomes: a complex nuclear genome ... , and a simple mitochondrial genome ... Mitochondria possess their own ribosomes and the few polypeptide-encoding genes in the mitochondrial genome produce mRMAs which are translated on the mitochondrial ribosomes. (p. 139); In animal cells, DNA is found in both the nucleus and the mitochondria. (p. 10); The mitochondria also have ribosomes and a limited capacity for protein synthesis." (p. 18) Lewin (2000): "A genome consists of the entire set of chromosomes for any particular organism, and therefore comprises a series of DNA molecules, each of which contains a series of many genes. The ultimate definition of a genome is to determine the sequence of the DNA of each chromosome. (p. 4); ... Genes not residing within the nucleus are generally described as extranuclear; they are transcribed and translated in the same organelle compartment (mitochondrion or chloroplast) in which they reside. By contrast, nuclear genes are expressed by means of cytoplasmic protein synthesis." (p. 81) [Back]
29 (Carlson, 1999): "Early mammalian embryogenesis is considered to be a highly regulative process. Regulation is the ability of an embryo or an organ primordium to produce a normal structure if parts have been removed or added. At the cellular level, it means that the fates of cells in a regulative system are not irretrievably fixed and that the cells can still respond to environmental cues." (p. 44). "... Blastomere removal and addition experiments have convincingly demonstrated the regulative nature (i.e., the strong tendency for the system to be restored to wholeness) of early mammalian embryos. Such knowledge is important in understanding the reason exposure of early human embryos to unfavorable environmental influences typically results in either death or a normal embryo." (p. 46) " ... Some types of twinning represent a natural experiment that demonstrates the highly regulative nature of early human embryos, ... ." (p. 48) "...The relationship between the position of the blastomeres and their ultimate developmental fate was incorporated into the inside-outside hypothesis. The outer blastomeres ultimately differentiate into the trophoblast, whereas the inner blastomeres form the inner cell mass, from which the body of the embryo arises. Although this hypothesis has been supported by a variety of experiments, the mechanisms by which the blastomeres recognize their positions and then differentiate accordingly have remained elusive and are still little understood. If marked blastomeres from disaggregated embryos are placed on the outside of another early embryo, they typically contribute to the formation of the trophoblast. Conversely, if the same marked cells are introduced into the interior of the host embryo, they participate in formation of the inner cell mass. Outer cells in the early mammalian embryo are linked by tight and gap junctions ... Experiments of this type demonstrate that the developmental potential or potency (the types of cells that a precursor cell can form) of many cells is greater than their normal developmental fate (the types of cells that a precursor cell normally forms)." (p. 45); O'Rahilly and Muller, 2001: "Biopsy of an embryo can be performed by removing one cell from a 4-cell, or two cells from an 8-cell, embryo. This does not seem to decrease the developmental capacity of the remaining cells." (p. 37); Kay T. Elder, "Laboratory techniques: Oocyte collection and embryo culture" in Peter Brinsden (ed.), A Textbook of In Vitro Fertilization and Assisted Reproduction, 2nd edition (New York: The Parthenon Publishing Group, 1999): "Surprisingly, fragmented embryos, repaired or not, do implant and often come to term. This demonstrates the highly robust nature of the human embryo, as it can apparently lose over half of its cellular mass and still recover." (p. 197) [Back]
30 O'Rahilly and Muller, 2001, op. cit. [Back]
31 Strachan and Read, 1999: "Animal clones occur naturally as a result of sexual reproduction. For example, genetically identical twins are clones who happened to have received exactly the same set of genetic instructions from two donor individuals, a mother and a father. A form of animal cloning can also occur as a result of artificial manipulation to bring about a type of asexual reproduction. The genetic manipulation in this case uses nuclear transfer technology: a nucleus is removed from a donor cell then transplanted into an oocyte whose own nucleus has previously been removed. The resulting 'renucleated' oocyte can give rise to an individual who will carry the nuclear genome of only one donor individual, unlike genetically identical twins. The individual providing the donor nucleus and the individual that develops from the 'renucleated' oocyte are usually described as "clones", but it should be noted that they share only the same nuclear DNA; they do not share the same mitochondrial DNA, unlike genetically identical twins." (pp. 508-509). [Back]
32 "Early mammalian embryogenesis is considered to be a highly regulative process. Regulation is the ability of an embryo or an organ primordium to produce a normal structure if parts have been removed or added. At the cellular level, it means that the fates of cells in a regulative system are not irretrievably fixed and that the cells can still respond to environmental cues." (pp. 44-49). ... Blastomere removal and addition experiments have convincingly demonstrated the regulative nature (i.e., the strong tendency for the system to be restored to wholeness) of early mammalian embryos. Such knowledge is important in understanding the reason exposure of early human embryos to unfavorable environmental influences typically results in either death or a normal embryo." (p. 46) [Carlson 1999] [Back]
33 "The embryo enters the uterine cavity after about half a week ... Each cell (blastomere) is considered to be still totipotent (capable, on isolation, of forming a complete embryo), and separation of these early cells is believed to account for one-third of cases of monozygotic twinning." (p. 37) "... Biopsy of an embryo can be performed by removing one cell from a 4-cell, or two cells from an 8-cell, embryo. This does not seem to decrease the developmental capacity of the remaining cells." [O'Rahilly and Muller 2001, p.37]
"Of the experimental techniques used to demonstrate regulative properties of early embryos, the simplest is to separate the blastomeres of early cleavage-stage embryos and determine whether each one can give rise to an entire embryo. This method has been used to demonstrate that single blastomeres, from two- and sometimes four-cell embryos can form normal embryos, ... " (p. 44); " ... Some types of twinning represent a natural experiment that demonstrates the highly regulative nature of early human embryos, ..." (p. 48); "... Monozygotic twins and some triplets, on the other hand, are the product of one fertilized egg. They arise by the subdivision and splitting of a single embryo. Although monozygotic twins could ... arise by the splitting of a two-cell embryo, it is commonly accepted that most arise by the subdivision of the inner cell mass in a blastocyst. Because the majority of monozygotic twins are perfectly normal, the early human embryo can obviously be subdivided and each component regulated to form a normal embryo." (p. 49) [Carlson 1999]
"If the splitting occurred during cleavage -- for example, if the two blastomeres produced by the first cleavage division become separated -- the monozygotic twin blastomeres will implant separately, like dizygotic twin blastomeres, and will not share fetal membranes. Alternatively, if the twins are formed by splitting of the inner cell mass within the blastocyst, they will occupy the same chorion but will be enclosed by separate amnions and will use separate placentae, each placenta developing around the connecting stalk of its respective embryo. Finally, if the twins are formed by splitting of a bilaminar germ disc, they will occupy the same amnion." (p. 325) [Larsen 1998] [Back]
34 "Another means of demonstrating the regulative properties of early mammalian embryos is to dissociate mouse embryos into separate blastomeres and then to combine the blastomeres of two or three embryos. The combined blastomeres soon aggregate and reorganize to become a single large embryo, which then goes on to become a normal-appearing tetraparental or hexaparental mouse. By various techniques of making chimeric embryos, it is even possible to combine blastomeres to produce interspecies chimeras (e.g., a sheep-goat)." (p. 45); "... The relationship between the position of the blastomeres and their ultimate developmental fate was incorporated into the inside-outside hypothesis. The outer blastomeres ultimately differentiate into the trophoblast, whereas the inner blastomeres form the inner cell mass, from which the body of the embryo arises. Although this hypothesis has been supported by a variety of experiments, the mechanisms by which the blastomeres recognize their positions and then differentiate accordingly have remained elusive and are still little understood. If marked blastomeres from disaggregated embryos are placed on the outside of another early embryo, they typically contribute to the formation of the trophoblast. Conversely, if the same marked cells are introduced into the interior of the host embryo, they participate in formation of the inner cell mass. Outer cells in the early mammalian embryo are linked by tight and gap junctions ... Experiments of this type demonstrate that the developmental potential or potency (the types of cells that a precursor cell can form) of many cells is greater than their normal developmental fate (the types of cells that a precursor cell normally forms)." (p. 45); " ... Classic strategies for investigating developmental properties of embryos are (1) removing a part and determining the way the remainder of the embryo compensates for the loss (such experiments are called deletion experiments) and (2) adding a part and determining the way the embryo integrates the added material into its overall body plan (such experiments are called addition experiments). Although some deletion experiments have been done, the strategy of addition experiments has proved to be most fruitful in elucidating mechanisms controlling mammalian embryogenesis." (p. 46). [Carlson 1999] [Back]
35 National Institutes of Health, Office of Science Planning and Policy, "CLONING: Present Uses and Promises", April 27, 1998), at: http://www1.od.nih.gov/osp/ospp/scipol/cloning.htm: "Cloning and somatic cell nuclear transfer are not synonymous. Cloning is the production of a precise genetic copy of DNA, a cell, or an individual plant or animal. Cloning can be successfully accomplished by using a number of different technologies. Somatic cell nuclear transfer is one specific technology that can be used for cloning." See also: Australia, The Cloning of Humans (Prevention) Bill 2001 (Queensland): "Cloning can occur naturally in the asexual reproduction of plants, the formation of identical twins and the multiplication of cells in the natural process of repair. The cloning of DNA, cells, tissues, organs and whole individuals is also achievable with artificial technologies. ... The cloning of a cell or an individual may be achieved through a number of techniques, including: molecular cloning ..., blastomere separation (sometimes called "twinning" after the naturally occurring process that creates identical twins): splitting a developing embryo soon after fertilisation of the egg by a sperm (sexual reproduction) to give rise to two or more embryos. The resulting organisms are identical twins (clones) containing DNA from both the mother and the father. ... somatic cell nuclear transfer: the transfer of the nucleus of a somatic cell into an unfertilised egg whose nucleus, and thus its genetic material, has been removed. A number of scientific review bodies have noted that the term "cloning" is applicable in various contexts, as a result of the development of a range of cloning techniques with varying applications",at: http://www.parliament.qld.gov.au/Parlib/Publications_pdfs/books/2001036.pdf. [Back]
36 Strachan and Read, 1999: "Animal clones occur naturally as a result of sexual reproduction. For example, genetically identical twins are clones who happened to have received exactly the same set of genetic instructions from two donor individuals, a mother and a father." (p. 508) [Back]
37 Many IVF providers are strongly promoting the use of twinning cloning techniques, a process they refer to as "embryo multiplication", e.g.: "Because early embryonic cells are totipotent, the possibility of splitting or separating the blastomeres of early preimplantation embryos to increase the number of embryos that are available for IVF treatment of infertility is being discussed Because embryo splitting could lead to two or more embryos with the same genome, the term "cloning" has been used to describe this practice. ... Whereas these ethical concerns raise important issues, neither alone nor together do they offer sufficient reasons for not proceeding with research into embryo splitting and blastomere separation. ... In sum, since embryo splitting has the potential to improve the efficacy of IVF treatments for infertility, research to investigate the technique is ethically acceptable. Persons asked to donate gametes or embryos for such research should be fully informed that research in embryo splitting is intended or planned as a result of their donation. The fears of possible future abuses of the technique are not sufficient to stop valid research in use of embryo splitting as a treatment for infertility. This statement was developed by the American Society for Reproductive Medicine's Ethics Committee and accepted by the Board of Directors on December 8, 1995." See, AMERICAN SOCIETY OF REPRODUCTIVE MEDICINE, at: http://www.asrm.com/Media/Ethics/embsplit.html.
See also: "New Ways to Produce Identical Twins -- A Continuing Controversy": "Now, a new method of actually producing identical twins looms near. Called "blastomere separation" (the separation of a two- to eight-cell blastomere into two identical demi-embryos), it is potentially one method of helping infertile couples have children through in vitro fertilization (IVF). ... The following is excerpted from the medical journal Assisted Reproduction Reviews, May 1994. Dr. Joe B. Massey, who heads an in vitro clinic in Atlanta. Dr. Massey reviews the advances in blastomere separation and discusses the potential indications, benefits, limitations, and ethics of using this method to produce monozygotic twin embryos for IVF patients. The Twins Foundation, by presenting Dr. Massey's material for your information neither advocates nor rejects any such procedures: 'Embryo Multiplication by Blastomere Separation -- One Doctor's Proposal'. [Massey]: In spite of many advances in human in vitro fertilization (IVF), there are still many problems. ... According to Dr. Massey, 'Observations on the potential impact of removing less than half of the cells from the human embryo have been well documented in pre-clinical embryo biopsy studies.' (For more on this story see Research Update Vol. 9, No. 1, 1994)." See, THE TWINS FOUNDATION, at: http://twinsfoundation.com/ru-v9n1-1994.htm.
See also: Professor Dr. Mithhat Erenus, "Embryo Multiplication": "In such cases, patients may benefit from embryo multiplication, as discussed in the study by Massey and co-workers. ... Since each early embryonic cell is totipotent (i.e., has the ability to develop and produce a normal adult), embryo multiplication is technically possible. ... In humans, removal of less than half of the cells from an embryo have been documented. No adverse effects were reported when an eighth to a quarter of the blastomeres were removed from an embryo on day 3 after insemination. ... Further evidence supporting the viability and growth of partial human embryos is provided by cryopreservation. After thawing four-cell embryos, some cells may not survive, leaving one-, two-, or three-cell embryos. These partial embryos survive and go to term, but at a lower rate than whole embryos. ... Based on the results observed in lower order mammals, the critical period of development to ensure success in separating human blastomeres should be at the time of embryonic gene expression, which is reported in humans to be between the four- and eight-cell stages [twinning by "blastomere splitting"]. .... The second potential method of embryo multiplication is blastocyst splitting. ... For couples who have less than three quality embryos for transfer, blastomere separation could be of benefit.." at: http://www.hekim.net/~erenus/20002001/asistedreproduction/micromanipulation/embryo_multiplication.htm.
See also "embryo self-selection": "The ability to grow embryos for five days to the blastocyst stage of development in the laboratory, rather than the traditional three days, allows clinicians to determine with greater certainty which embryos are really the "best" in terms of their potential for implantation. Consequently, blastocyst culture makes it possible to select the best one or two blastocysts vs. three or four early embryos to transfer back to the mother. Fertility centers like Shady Grove constantly strive to improve IVF success rates through the steady refinements of clinical and laboratory techniques. Clinical blastocyst culture and transfer is the next important step in that evolution,' explains Robert Stillman, MD: 'After five days of growth, the cells of the embryo should have divided many times over, and have begun to differentiate by function. The embryos that survive to this stage of development are usually strong, healthy, and robust. ... Simply put, this self selection can be viewed as 'survival of the fittest. ... Which ones to transfer? Which ones are really the "best'? Two additional days in the blastocyst culture medium allows the natural winnowing process to continue. Thus, after 5 days of growth in the laboratory, only 2 or 3 of the original ten embryos may remain viable. We now know the best embryos to transfer. ... In thinking of the example above, patients who have fewer oocytes retrieved, fewer fertilized or fewer dividing embryos by day three in culture have no advantage using blastocyst culture, since little is to be gained in further embryo 'self selection'. Dr. Stillman emphasizes." FERTILITY NETWORK, at: http://fertilitynetwork.com/articles/articles-blastocyst.htm.
Also, ETHICS COMMITTEE OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR REPRODUCTIVE MEDICINE, "'Ethical Considerations of Assisted Reproductive Technologies': Originally published as a supplement to the ASRM medical journal (Fertility and Sterility 1994;62:Suppl 1), Ethical Considerations for Assisted Reproductive Technologies covers the American Society for Reproductive Medicine's position on several aspects of reproductive medicine, including: ... the moral and legal status of the preembryo, ... the use of donor sperm, donor oocytes and donor preembryos, ... the cryopreservation of oocytes and preembryos, micro techniques such as: zona drilling, microinjection, blastomere separation (cloning), and assisted hatching." at: http://www.asrm.com/Media/Ethics/ethics94.html. [Back]
38 Strachan and Read, 1999: "A form of animal cloning can also occur as a result of artificial manipulation to bring about a type of asexual reproduction. The genetic manipulation in this case uses nuclear transfer technology: a nucleus is removed from a donor cell then transplanted into an oocyte whose own nucleus has previously been removed. The resulting 'renucleated' oocyte can give rise to an individual who will carry the nuclear genome of only one donor individual, unlike genetically identical twins. The individual providing the donor nucleus and the individual that develops from the 'renucleated' oocyte are usually described as "clones", but it should be noted that they share only the same nuclear DNA; they do not share the same mitochondrial DNA, unlike genetically identical twins." (pp. 508-509). [Back]
39 Larsen, 1998: "Like all normal somatic (i.e., non-germ cells), the primordial germ cells contain 23 pairs of chromosomes, or a total of 46 [and thus could be cloned by nuclear transplant]" (p. 4); Strachan and Read, 1999: "A subset of the diploid body cells constitute the germ line. These give rise to specialized diploid cells in the ovary and testis that can divide by meiosis to produce haploid gametes. (p. 28); Moore and Persaud 1998: "Meiosis is a special type of cell division that involves two meiotic cell divisions; it takes place in germ cells only. Diploid germ cells give rise to haploid gametes (sperms and oocytes)." (p. 18); Carlson, 1999: "In a mitotic division, each germ cell produces two diploid progeny that are genetically equal." (p. 2); O'Rahilly and Muller, 2001: "Future somatic cells thereby lose their totipotency and are liable to senescence, whereas germ cells regain their totipotency after meiosis and fertilization [and therefore could undergo regulation to produce new embryos]." (p. 39); Strachan and Read, 1999: "Early primordial germ cells are spared; their genomic DNA remains very largely unmethylated until after gonadal differentiation and as the germ cells develop whereupon widespread de novo methylation occurs. (p. 191) [Back]
40 See, e.g., Philip Cohen, "Like a virgin", in Cloning: Special Report, at: http://iggi.unesco.or.kr/web/iggi_docs/04/952655279.pdf; Gordon, J.W. and Ruddle, F.H. (1981) "Integration and stable germline transmission of genes injected into mouse pronuclei," Science 214: 1244-1246; M. C. Valiotis, O. Lacham-Kaplan and A. O. Trounson, "Pronuclei formation and embryo cleavage following electrofusion of round spermatids with oocytes from the mouse", Australian Society for Reproductive Biology, p. 48, 1993. [Back]
41 See, e.g., the current New Zealand cloning bill, which defines a "gamete" as including "any other cell (whether naturally occurring or artificially formed or modified) that contains only 1 copy of all or most chromosomes; and is capable of being used for reproductive purposes." [Human Assisted Reproductive Technology Bill: Supplementary Order Paper [HART SOP], April 2003, at: http://www.justice.govt.nz/pubs/other/pamphlets/2003/hart/Supp_order_paper.pdf. To grasp the entirety of what this legislation would embrace, see the government's on-line pamphlet, Governmental Proposals to Amend the Human Assisted Reproductive Technology Bill: Questions and Answers, May 2003.] [Back]
42 Irving Weissman and Amy Adams, , "Understanding the Institute for Cancer/Stem Cell Biology and Medicine", Standford Report, Jan. 22, 2003, at: news-service.stanford.edu/news/ 2003/january22/weissman.html. See also, "New Stanford institute sparks cloning quarrel", Nature, at: http://www.nature.com/cgi-taf/DynaPage.taf?file=/nm/journal/v9/n2/full/nm0203-156b.html; John Travis, "Stem Cell Success: Mice fuel debate on embryo cloning", Science News Online, March 16, 2002, at: http://www.sciencenews.org/20020316/fob1.asp; "Clone by any Other Name", Weekly Standard, Dec.23, 2002, at: http://www.weeklystandard.com/content/public/ articles/000/000/002/016htlqv.asp - 26k. [Back]
43 Vatican's Mission to the United Nations, The Views of the Holy See on Human Cloning, February 2003, at: http://www.lifeissues.net/writers/doc/doc_11humancloning.html. [Back]
44 Encyclical Letter: Evangelium vitae (Mar. 1995), at: http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/encyclicals/documents/hf_jp-ii_enc_25031995_evangelium-vitae_en.html [Back]
45 Personal communication. [Back]
46 Encyclical Letter: Evangelium vitae (Mar. 1995), at: http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/encyclicals/documents/hf_jp-ii_enc_25031995_evangelium-vitae_en.html [Back]
47 See, e.g., Dianne N. Irving, Irving, "Requested testimony on Canadian Bill C-13 ('Assisted Human Reproduction Act'), House of Commons, December 9, 2002, at: http://www.lifeissues.net/writers/irv/irv_16canadianbill.html; also: Irving, "University Faculty for Life: Submission of Concern to the Canadian CIHR Re the 'Human Stem Cell Research Recommendations 2001'", written as UFL Board Member on behalf of UFL, submitted to Dr. Alan Bernstein, President, Canadian Institutes of Health Research Working Group on Stem Cell Research, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada (June 3, 2001), at: http://www.uffl.org/irving/irvcihr.htm; Irving, "University Faculty for Life: Submission of Concern to the British House of Lords Re the 'Human Fertilisation and Embryology (Research Purposes) Regulations 2001'", written as UFL Board Member on behalf of UFL, submitted to Tony Rawsthorne, Select Committee, House of Lords, London (June 1, 2001), at: http://www.uffl.org/irving/irvlords.htm; Irving, "One Act Drama: The early human embryo: 'Scientific' myths / scientific facts: Implications for ethics and public policy", presented at Medicine and Human Dignity's "International Bioethics Conference: 'Conceiving the embryo'", (re human cloning and human embryonic stem cell research), Brussels, Belgium, October 20, 2002, (in press, and CD-Rom); at: http://www.lifeissues.net/writers/irv/irv_11oneactdrama1.html. Irving, invited Congressional witness (oral and written testimony), "The immediate product of human cloning is a human being: Claims to the contrary are scientifically wrong", Scientific Panel (one of 5 panelists), on "Cloning: Legal, Medical, Ethical, and Social Issues", Hearing before the Subcommittee on Health and Environment of the Committee on Commerce, U.S. House of Representatives, Room 2125, Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, D.C. (February 12, 1998), also published in The Linacre Quarterly May 1999, 66:2:26-40, and at: http://www.uffl.org/irving/irvhouse.htm. [Back]
48 State of Arkansas human cloning "ban", As Engrossed, Senate Bill No 185 (2003): at http://www.accessarkansas.org/lobbyist/arliab/src/public/bills/2003/html/sb185.html. See Irving analysis at: http://www.lifeissues.net/writers/irvi/irvi_13arkansas1.html. [Back]
49 State of California human cloning "ban", Bill No. AB 267 (2003): at http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/bill/asm/ab_0251-0300/ab_267_bill_20030204_introduced.html. [Back]
50 State of Florida human cloning "ban", Senate Bill 1726 (2003): at http://www.flsenate.gov/cgi-bin/view_page.pl?Tab=session&Submenu=1&FT=D&File=sb1726.html&Directory=session/2003/Senate/bills/billtext/html/. See Irving analysis at: http://www.lifeissues.net/writers/irvi/irvi_05floridaamendment.html. [Back]
51 State of Louisiana human cloning "ban", House Bill No. 1810 (2003): at http://www.legis.state.la.us/leg_docs/03RS/CVT5/OUT/0000K8X5.PDF. See Irving analysis at: http://www.lifeissues.net/writers/irvi/irvi_07louisianabill.html. [Back]
52 State of Massachusetts human cloning "ban", Senate Bill No.1917 (2003): at http://www.state.ma.us/legis/bills/st01917.htm. [Back]
53 State of Michigan human cloning "ban", Act No. 368 (1998): at http://www.michiganlegislature.org/mileg.asp?page=getObject&objName=mcl-333-16274&queryid=4185768&highlight=human%20cloning, and Act No. 111 (1998): at http://www.michiganlegislature.org/documents/1997-1998/publicact/pdf/1998-PA-0111.pdf. [Back]
54 State of Nebraska human cloning "ban", Legislative Bill No. 602 (2003). [Back]
55 State of New Jersey human cloning "ban", Assembly Bill No. 2840/Senate Bill No. 1909 (2003): at http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/2002/Bills/A3000/2840_I1.PDF. See Irving analysis at: http://www.lifeissues.net/writers/irvi/irvi_10newjersey1.html. [Back]
56 State of New York human cloning "ban", Senate Bill No. 206 (2003): at http://assembly.state.ny.us/leg/?bn=S00206&sh=t. [Back]
57 State of North Dakota human cloning "ban", House Bill No. 1424 (2003): http://www.state.nd.us/lr/assembly/58-2003/bill_text/DAUB0400.pdf. [Back]
58 State of South Carolina human cloning "ban", House Bill No. 3819 (2003): at http://www.scstatehouse.net/cgi-bin/query2001.exe?first=DOC&querytext=cloning&category=Legislation&session=115&conid=383237&result_pos=0&keyval=1153819&printornot=N. See Irving analysis at: http://www.lifeissues.net/writers/irvi/irvi_11southcarolina.html. [Back]
59 State of Wisconsin human cloning "ban", Assembly Bill No. 104 (2003): http://www.legis.state.wi.us/2003/data/AB-104.pdf. See Irving analysis at: http://www.lifeissues.net/writers/irvi/irvi_08wisconsinban.html. [Back]
60 Key proponents of "total human cloning bans" have long acknowledged the serious problems concerning mDNA and the consequences of these scientific facts for the lack of genetic identity of the real product of SCNT, the new living cloned human embryo, e.g.: (1) Congressional website, Cloning Basics: 101: "What is Cloning?" ... It is false to say that cloning solves the transplant rejection problem. Each embryo clone would still contain mitochondrial DNA from the egg donor; the clone is NOT an exact genetic copy of the nucleus donor, and its antigens would therefore provoke immune rejection when transplanted. There would still be the problem of immunological rejection that cloning is said to be indispensable for solving,"at http://www.house.gov/weldon/issues/clone_basics.htm. (2) "Congressman Weldon's Cloning Facts", quoting testimony of Dr. Irving Weissman before the President's Council on Bioethics, "I should say that when you put the nucleus in from a somatic cell, the mitochondria still come from the host" [from the female egg] ... And in mouse studies it is clear that those genetic differences can lead to a mild but certainly effective transplant rejection and so immunosuppression, mild though it is, will be required for that", at http://www.nrlc.org/Killing_Embryos/Weldoncloningfacts022603.hrml; also at: http://www.traditionalvalues.org/pdf_files/Human_Cloning.pdf. (3) Transcript of House Hearing introducing Weldon Bill, Cliff Stearns (FL) testimony before Hearing before the Subcommittee on Health of the Committee on Energy and Commerce, House of Representatives, 107th Congress, 1st Session on H.R. 1644 and H.R. 2172 (June 20, 2001, "Seven States' proposals ban the creation of genetically identical individuals, but that leaves another loophole. An egg cell, donated for cloning, has its own mytochondrial DNA, which is different from the mytochondrial DNA of the cell that provided the nucleus. The clone will, therefore, not truly be identical", at: http://energycommerce.house.gov/107/hearings/06202001Hearing291/print.htm. (4) Senator Sam Brownback, "Some proponents of human cloning claim that an embryo created in this manner will have cells that are a genetic match to the patient being cloned, and thus would not be rejected by the patient's immune system. This claim is overstated at best; in fact there are some scientific reports that show the presence of mitochondrial DNA in the donor egg can trigger an immune-response rejection in the patient being treated, in "A True Complete Ban", National Review Online, Feb. 26, 2003, at: http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/comment-brownback022603.asp. (5) Leon Kass, "Before one starts arguing the morality of embryo farming, we should know that the whole matter is science fiction. The egg containing my nucleus is not fully my genetic twin. It also contains residual DNA -- mitochondrial DNA -- from the woman who donated the egg. The cloned embryo and all cells derived from it remain partly 'foreign,' enough to cause transplant rejection", in The Chicago Tribune, July 31, 2001, quoted by Dave Andrusko in, "Averting a Catastrophe", at: http://www.nrlc.org/news/2001/NRL08/editA.html. (6) President's Council on Bioethics, "The technique of cloning ... bring to live birth a cloned animal that is genetically virtually identical (except for the mitochondrial DNA) to the animal that donated the adult cell nucleus", in Human Cloning and Human Dignity: An Ethical Inquiry, "Executive Summary; Fair and Accurate Terminology; Scientific Background", at: http://www.bioethics.gov/reports/cloningreport/execsummary.html. (7) George Annas, "How could such stem-cell lines be generated? One way is by transferring somatic-cell nuclei into enucleated eggs (nuclear transplantation). When stimulated to divide, the cell can form blastocysts of predefined nuclear genotype (with the mitochondrial DNA coming from the egg)", The New England Journal of Medicine, Volume 346:1576-1579 May 16, 200, "Stem Cells Scientific, Medical, and Political Issues", at: http://www.gardacuore.net/rigenerativa/ARTICOLI/NEJM_Issues.htm. [[emphases added]] [Back]
61 Henry Campbell Black, Black's Law Dictionary (4th ed.) (St. Paul, MN: West Publishing Co, 1951), pp. 1577-1578. [Back]
62 See, e.g., at http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query. [Back]
63 However, see: Irving, "University Faculty for Life Letter of Concerns About the Human Cloning Bans" at: http://www.uffl.org/irving/irvbrownback.htm; such definitions are also duplicated in many state and international cloning "bans" (see notes supra), as well as in President Bush's United States' proposal for the "United Nations Human Cloning Treaty" to be voted on this month (e.g., see, Reuters, "U.S. Plans New Anti-Cloning Push at U.N.", Sept. 17, 2003, at: http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20030917/sc_nm/science_cloning_un_dc_1. [Back]
64 Such are the stated goals of "nano/bio/info/cogno", supported by this government and many internationally popular "futuristic" programs, e.g., see Converging Technologies for Improving Human Performance (National Science Foundation, and the U.S. Dept. of Commerce, June 2002); you can find the report at: http://itri.loyola.edu/ConvergingTechnologies/Report/NBIC pre publication.pdf, or at: http://www.wtec.org/reports.htm. [Back]
65 Strachan and Read, 1999: "Animal clones occur naturally as a result of sexual reproduction. For example, genetically identical twins are clones who happened to have received exactly the same set of genetic instructions from two donor individuals, a mother and a father. A form of animal cloning can also occur as a result of artificial manipulation to bring about a type of asexual reproduction. The genetic manipulation in this case uses nuclear transfer technology: a nucleus is removed from a donor cell then transplanted into an oocyte whose own nucleus has previously been removed. The resulting 'renucleated' oocyte can give rise to an individual who will carry the nuclear genome of only one donor individual, unlike genetically identical twins. The individual providing the donor nucleus and the individual that develops from the 'renucleated' oocyte are usually described as "clones", but it should be noted that they share only the same nuclear DNA; they do not share the same mitochondrial DNA, unlike genetically identical twins." (pp. 508-509) [Back]
66 See especially, Strachan and Read (1999), pp. 539-541: "From the ethical point of view, an important consideration is to what extent technologies developed in an attempt to engineer the human germline could subsequently be used not to treat disease but in genetic enhancement. There are powerful arguments as to why germline gene therapy is pointless. There are serious concerns, therefore, that a hidden motive for germline gene therapy is to enable research to be done on germline manipulation with the ultimate aim of germline-based genetic enhancement. The latter could result in positive eugenics programs, whereby planned genetic modification of the germline could involve artificial selection for genes that are thought to confer advantageous traits. ... The implications of human genetic enhancement are enormous. Future technological developments may make it possible to make very large alterations to the human germline by, for example, adding many novel genes using human artificial chromosomes (Grimes and Cooke, 1998). Some people consider that this could advance human evolution, possibly paving the way for a new species, homo sapientissimus. To have any impact on evolution, however, genetic enhancement would need to be operated on an unfeasibly large scale (Gordon, 1999). ... Even if positive eugenics programs were judged to be acceptable in principle and genetic enhancement were to be practiced on a small scale, there are extremely serious ethical concerns. Who decides what traits are advantageous? Who decides how such programs will be carried out? Will the people selected to have their germlines altered be chosen on their ability to pay? How can we ensure that it will not lead to discrimination against individuals? Previous negative eugenics programs serve as a cautionary reminder. In the recent past, for example, there have been horrifying eugenics programs in Nazi Germany, and also in many states of the USA where compulsory sterilization of individuals adjudged to be feeble-minded was practiced well into the present century." [Back]
67 O'Rahilly and Muller, 2001: "Gametogenesis is the production of germ cells (gametes), i.e., spermatozoa and oocytes. ... The gametes are believed to arise by successive divisions from a distinct line of cells (the germ plasm), and the cells that are not directly concerned with gametogenesis are termed somatic. ... Diploid refers to the presence of two sets of homologous chromosomes: 23 pairs, making a total of 46. This is characteristic of somatic and primordial germ cells alike." (p. 19); Strachan and Read (1999): "A subset of the diploid body cells constitute the germ line. These give rise to specialized diploid cells in the ovary and testis that can divide by meiosis to produce haploid gametes (sperm and egg). ... The other cells of the body, apart from the germ line, are known as somatic cells ... most somatic cells are diploid ... ." (p. 28); Moore and Persaud, 1998: " Meiosis is a special type of cell division that involves two meiotic cell divisions; it takes place in germ cells only. Diploid germ cells give rise to haploid gametes (sperms and oocytes)." (p. 18); Carlson, 1999: "In a mitotic division, each germ cell produces two diploid progeny that are genetically equal." (p. 2); Larsen , 1998: "Like all normal somatic cells (i.e., non-germ cells), the primordial germ cells contain 23 pairs of chromosomes, or a total of 46." (p. 4) [Back]
68 O'Rahilly and Muller, 2001: "[Primordial germ cells] are difficult to recognize in very young human embryos. Claims for them have been made as early as in the blastocyst, and they are believed to be segregated at latest by 2 1/2 weeks and possibly much earlier. ... The unifying feature in the formation of primordial germ cells would seem to be the exemption of those cells from the processes of regional, somatic differentiation. (pp., 23-24) ... Cells differentiate by the switching off of large portions of their genome. Future somatic cells thereby lose their totipotency and are liable to senescence, whereas germ cells regain their totipotency after meiosis and fertilization. (p. 39) ... Stem cells comprise a small subpopulation of multipotent or pluripotent, ultrastructurally unspecialized, slow-cycling cells that possess the ability of self-renewal and can produce cells that are destined to differentiate. (In contrast, primordial germ cells and those of a morula are totipotent; i.e., they can develop into any type of embryonic tissue and can even form an entirely new embryo)." (p. 136) [Back]
69 For an extensive scientific and philosophical treatment of the bioethics concepts of "delayed personhood", see Irving, "Scientific and philosophical expertise: An evaluation of the arguments on 'personhood'", Linacre Quarterly February 1993, 60:1:18-46, and at: http://www.lifeissues.net/writers/irv/irv_04person1.html. [Back]
70 Pontifical Academy for Life: Third Plenary Assembly: Concluding Document: Identity and Status of the Human Embryo (Feb. 1997) at: http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_academies/acdlife/documents/rc_pa_acdlife_doc_16021997_final-doc_en.html. [Back]
71 Encyclical Letter: Evangelium vitae (Mar. 1995), at: http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/encyclicals/documents/hf_jpii_enc_25031995_evangelium-vitae_en.html. See extensive quotations from many Church documents on this issue in the attached Appendix. [Back]
72 Pontifical Academy for Life: Third Plenary Assembly: Concluding Document: Identity and Status of the Human Embryo (Feb. 1997), at: http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_academies/acdlife/documents/rc_pa_acdlife_doc_16021997_final-doc_en.html. [Back]
73 For a brief comparison of secular bioethics and the moral principles used in Church teachings, see Irving, "Which ethics for the 21st century? A comparison of 'secular bioethics' and Roman Catholic medical ethics", Linacre Quarterly (in press), and at: http://www.lifeissues.net/writers/irv/irv_02ethics1.html. [Back]
74 For an historical summary and extensive analysis of "bioethics", and the role that it has played in creating and propagating so much of the erroneous science in these human embryo research issues, see Irving, "What is Ôbioethics'?", University Faculty forLife Proceedings of the Conference 2000, in Joseph W. Koterski (ed.), Life and Learning X: Proceedings of the Tenth University Faculty For Life Conference (Washington, D.C.: University Faculty For Life, 2002), pp. 1-84. See also, Irving, "The early human embryo: 'Scientific' myths / scientific facts: Implications for ethics and public policy", presented at Medicine and Human Dignity's "International Bioethics Conference: 'Conceiving the embryo'", (re human cloning and human embryonic stem cell research), Brussels, Belgium; October 20, 2002, (in press, and CD-Rom); Irving, "The impact of international bioethics on the 'sanctity of life ethic', and the ability of Catholic ObGyn's to practice according to conscience", presented at the international conference, "The Future of Obstetrics and Gynaecology: The Fundamental Human Right to Practice and Be Trained According to Conscience", sponsored by the International Federation of Catholic Medical Associations (FIAMC), and MaterCare International, Rome, Italy, June 18, 2001, Proceedings of the Conference (in press), also in, Journal: Canadian Chapter, Fellowship of Catholic Scholars (Autumn 2002), pp. 7-32; Irving, "The bioethics mess", Crisis Magazine, Vol. 19, No. 5, May 2001; Irving, "The stem cell decision in the labs: Beware of flawed ethics and false science", Newsday.com, July 15, 2001, B5. Most of these articles can be found on-line at http://www.lifeissues.net, and http://www.uffl.org/annotated.htm. [Back]
75 The National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research, The Belmont Report (Washington, D.C: U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, 1978); The National Research Act, Public Law 93-348, 93rd Congress, 2nd session (July 12, 1974); 88 STAT 342. See also, Albert R. Jonsen, The Birth of Bioethics (New York: Oxford University Press, 1998); also, David J. Rothman, Strangers at the Bedside: A History of How Law and Bioethics Transformed Medical Decision Making (New York: Basic Books; a subsidiary of Perseus Books, L.L.C., 1991); D. N. Irving, "What is 'bioethics'?", UFL Proceedings of the Conference 2000, in Joseph W. Koterski (ed.), Life and Learning X: Proceedings of the Tenth University Faculty For Life Conference (Washington, D.C.: University Faculty For Life, 2002), pp. 1-84. [Copy submitted to this Committee for the official record.] This writer has one of her two doctoral concentrations in bioethics from the Kennedy Institute of Ethics, Georgetown University (1991). See also my doctoral dissertation, Philosophical and Scientific Analysis of the Nature of the Early Human Embryo (Washington, D. C.: Georgetown University 1991). [Back]
76 See, e.g., E.g., Tom Beauchamp and James Childress, Principles of Biomedical Ethics (1st ed.) (New York: Oxford University Press, 1979), pp. 45-47; Tom Beauchamp and LeRoy Walters (eds.), Contemporary Issues in Bioethics (2nd ed.) (Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company, Inc., 1982), p.26; Tom Beauchamp, Philosophical Ethics (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1982, pp. 124-128, 141, 188-190; Tom Beauchamp; and Laurence B. McCullough, Medical Ethics: The Moral Responsibilities of Physicians (New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1984), pp. 13-16, 21-22, 39-40, 46, 48, 133-35, 162-64. [Back]
77 See Irving, "Which ethics for science and public policy?", Accountability in Research 1993, 3(2-3):77-99, and at: http://www.uffl.org/irving/irvaccount.htm; Irving, "The impact of scientific 'misinformation' on other fields: Philosophy, theology, biomedical ethics and public policy", Accountability in Research April 1993, 2(4):243-272, and at: http://www.uffl.org/irving/irvimpact.htm. [Back]
78 E.g., The Hastings Center's Daniel Callahan conceded in the 25th anniversary issue of The Hastings Center Report celebrating the "birth of bioethics", that the principles of bioethics simply had not worked. But not to worry, he said, we might try communitarianism now: "The range of questions that a communitarian bioethics would pose could keep the field of bioethics well and richly occupied for at least another 25 years"! (emphases added) [Daniel Callahan, "Bioethics: Private Choice and Common Good", Hastings Center Report (May-June 1994), 24:3:31]. [Back]
79 "A fairly widespread perception exists, both within and without the bioethics community, that the prevailing U.S. approach to the ethical problems raised by modern medicine is ailing. Principlism [bioethics] is the patient. The diagnosis is complex, but many believe that the patient is seriously, if not terminally, ill. The prognosis is uncertain. Some observers have proposed a variety of therapies to restore it to health. Others expect its demise and propose ways to go on without it.", Albert Jonsen, in Edwin DuBose, Ronald Hamel and Laurence O'Connell (eds.), A Matter of Principles?: Ferment in U.S. Bioethics (Valley Forge, PA: Trinity Press International, 1994), p.1. See also: Gilbert C. Meilaender, Body Soul, and Bioethics (Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 1995), p. x; Raanan Gillon (ed.), Principles of Health Care Ethics (New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1994) -- in which 99 scholars from around the world jump into the fray over bioethics -- by far the majority of them arguing against bioethics "principlism"; Renee Fox, "The Evolution of American Bioethics: A Sociological Perspective," in George Weisz (ed.), Social Sciences Perspective on Medical Ethics (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1990), pp. 201-220. Renee Fox and Judith Swazey, "Medical Morality is Not Bioethics -- Medical Ethics in China and the United States," Perspectives in Biology and Medicine 27 (1984):336-360, in Jonsen p. 358; Renee C. Fox and Judith P. Swazey, "Leaving the Field", Hastings Center Report (September-October 1992), 22:5:9-15. [Back]
80 Original Hastings Center scholar Robert Morison, in Jonsen (pp. 109-110). As Jonsen noted, "Morison's letter was a sobering reminder of the anomalous role of an 'ethics commission' in a pluralistic, secular society." [Back]
81 A considerable amount of the erroneous "science" used in current bioethics debates on human embryo research, human cloning, stem cell research, etc., can be found in the earliest bioethics "founding" documents. For example, the National Commission's Report on the Fetus (1975) stated: "For the purposes of this report, the Commission has used the following [scientific] definitions which, in some instances, differ from medical, legal or common usage. These definitions have been adopted in the interest of clarity and to conform to the language used in the legislative mandate" [referring to The National Research Act 1974]. Examples of their erroneous scientific definitions are the definition of "pregnancy" as beginning at implantation, and of "fetus" as also beginning at implantation. (The National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research; Report and Recommendations; Research on the Fetus; U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, 1975, p. 5; see also, Title 45; Code of Federal Regulations; Part 46 [45 CFR 46]: Office for the Protection from Research Risks [OPRR]: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 1983, p. 12.) [Back]
82 Peter Singer, "Taking life: abortion", in Practical Ethics (London: Cambridge University Press, 1981), p. 118. See also: Helga Kuhse and Peter Singer, "For sometimes letting - and helping - die", Law, Medicine and Health Care 3(4), 1986: pp. 149-153; also Kuhse and Singer, Should the Baby Live? The Problem of Handicapped Infants (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1985), p. 138; Peter Singer and Helga Kuhse, "The ethics of embryo research", Law, Medicine and Health Care 14(13-14), 1987. For one reaction, see Gavin J. Fairbairn, "Kuhse, Singer and slippery slopes", Journal of Medical Ethics 14 (1988), p. 134. [Back]
83 See Dianne N. Irving, "Science, philosophy, theology - and altruism: the chorismos and the zygon", in Hans May, Meinfried Striegnitz, Philip Hefner (eds.), Loccumer Protokolle (Rehburg-Loccum: Evangelische Akademie Loccum, 1996); Etienne Gilson, Being and Some Philosophers (Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies, 1949); Frederick Copleston, A History of Philosophy (New York: Image Books, 1962); Leonard J. Eslick, "The material substrate in Plato", in Ernan McMullin (ed.), The Concept of Matter in Greek and Medieval Philosophy (Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press, 1963); Frederick Wilhelmsen, Man's Knowledge of Reality (New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1956), esp. Chaps. 2 and 3. For an excellent explanation of the difference between basing "personhood" on just functionality vs. the kind of nature possessed, see Kevin Doran, "Person -- a key concept for ethics", Linacre Quarterly 56 (4), 1989, 39. [Back]
84 See D. N. Irving, Philosophical and Scientific Analysis of the Nature of the Early Human Embryo (doctoral dissertation) (Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University, 1991). A short version of the dissertation can be found in D. N. Irving, "Philosophical and scientific expertise: An evaluation of the arguments on 'personhood'" (Linacre Quarterly, Feb. 1993, 60:1:18-46). [Back]
85 Peter Singer, "Heavy Petting", at: http://www.nerve.com/Opinions/Singer/heavyPetting//. [Caution: pornographic website.] [Back]
86 Richard G. Frey, "The ethics of the search for benefits: Animal experimentation in medicine", in Raanan Gillon (ed.), Principles of Health Care Ethics (New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1994), pp. 1067-1075. [Back]
87 Irving, "The woman and the physician facing abortion: The role of correct science in the formation of conscience and the moral decision making process", presented at "The Scientific Congress, The Guadalupan Appeal: The dignity and status of the human embryo", Mexico City, October 28-29, 1999, published in Un Appello Per La Vita: The Guadalupan Appeal: Dignita E Statuto Dell'embryione Umano (Libreria Editrice Vaticana (2000), pp. 203-223, also in, Linacre Quarterly Nov./Dec. 2000), and at: http://www.lifeissues.net/writers/irv/irv_03facing1.html. See also Irving, ., "The impact of international bioethics on the 'sanctity of life ethic', and the ability of Catholic ObGyn's to practice according to conscience"; presented at the international conference, "The Future of Obstetrics and Gynaecology: The Fundamental Human Right to Practice and Be Trained According to Conscience"; sponsored by the International Federation of Catholic Medical Associations (FIAMC), and MaterCare International, Rome, Italy, June 18, 2001, Proceedings of the Conference (in press) and at: http://perso.club-internet.fr/frblin/fiamc/03events/0110gyneco/gyntexts/irving.htm and at http://www.matercare.org/Rome/Part1Irving.html; also in, Journal: Canadian Chapter, Fellowship of Catholic Scholars (Autumn 2002), pp. 7-32, and at: http://www.lifeissues.net/writers/irv/irv_40bioandconscience01.html [Back]
88 Encyclical Letter: Evangelium vitae 58 (Mar. 1995), at http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/encyclicals/documents/hf_jp-ii_enc_25031995_evangelium-vitae_en.html. [Back]
89 Pieper, supra, pp. 34-35. [Back]
90 Doctrinal Note on Some Questions Regarding the Participation of Catholics in Political Life, Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, November 24, 2002, at: http://www.lifeissues.net/writers/doc/doc_24catholicsandpolitics.html. [Back]
91 Encyclical Letter: Evangelium vitae 81 (Mar. 1995), at http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/encyclicals/documents/hf_jp-ii_enc_25031995_evangelium-vitae_en.html. [Back]
92 Doctrinal Note on Some Questions Regarding the Participation of Catholics in Political Life, Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, November 24, 2002, at http://www.lifeissues.net/writers/doc/doc_24catholicsandpolitics.html>. [Back]
Next Page: Appendix:
1, 2, 3, 4