Stem cell bill passes House but falls short of override

By Tom Strode - May 13, 2005 - comment

The House of Representatives passed a bill May 24 to provide federal funds for stem cell research that destroys embryos but fell about 50 votes short of the two-thirds majority that would be needed to override a promised presidential veto.

The House approved nearly unanimously another stem cell research bill, one that was supported by pro-life members because it does not require embryo destruction.

Representatives voted 238-194 for the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act, H.R. 810, which would repeal President Bush’s policy prohibiting federal funds for stem cell research that results in the destruction of human embryos. The president’s rule, announced in August 2001, allows funding for research only on embryonic stem cell lines already in existence prior to his announcement of the policy.

On the same day as the House vote, the White House reaffirmed Bush would veto the bill, which would underwrite research that uses embryos left over at in vitro fertilization clinics. Rep. Michael Castle, R.-Del., is the chief sponsor of the measure.

In action immediately after the embryonic stem cell legislation was approved, the House voted 431-1 for the Stem Cell Therapeutic and Research Act, H.R. 2520. The bill would authorize $79 million over five years for the collection, testing and storage of stem cells from umbilical cord blood.

Embryonic stem cell research not only is destructive, it has failed to produce any successful therapies in human beings and has been plagued by the development of tumors in lab animals. Meanwhile, research using stem cells from non-embryonic sources such as cord blood and bone marrow has produced treatments for at least 58 ailments, according to the National Right to Life Committee. These include spinal cord injuries, rheumatoid arthritis, lupus, multiple sclerosis and sickle cell anemia.

“I am disappointed that a majority of the House voted to support the Castle bill,” ERLC President Richard Land said. “My disappointment is somewhat mollified by the fact that it does not appear they have a veto-proof majority, and the president has promised to veto this legislation if it reaches his desk.

“Enactment of this bill would be taking a step down a very steep and slippery slope that devalues human life. When any human life is deemed less valuable than other human life, all human life is diminished.”

A few hours before the House action, Bush defended his 2001 policy in a White House speech. The president met before his speech with 21 families who either have adopted or given up for adoption frozen embryos stored after in vitro fertilization treatments. With children who were once frozen embryos in attendance at his speech, Bush said they “remind us that there is no such thing as a spare embryo. These lives are not raw materials to be exploited but gifts. And I commend each of the families here today for accepting the gift of these children and offering them the gift of your love.”

Further Learning

Learn more about: Life, Stem-Cell Research, Citizenship, Legislation

Post a Comment




Notify me of follow-up comments?

Before You Submit Your Comment (below), Read This:

Thank you for your interest in the ministry of the Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission (SBC).

Comments are moderated to preserve the family-oriented nature of this website and in an attempt to avoid comment spam. We welcome opposing viewpoints, and we will not turn comments away as long as your views are presented with respect to everyone.

Your comments will not appear immediately and are subject to editing or deletion. We will make every attempt to check new comments in a timely manner, though there will likely be delays on the weekends and around holidays.

Please follow the these guidelines to insure your comments will be posted:

  1. Use a real name, at least a real first name. We find folks are less-rude online when not hiding behind a screen-name.
  2. Name-calling and vulgar-language will not be tolerated. Zero-tolerance is our policy. We will not spend time editing profanity. If it contains foul language, your post will be deleted. Oh, and we decide what is and what is not vulgar.
  3. Comments must be on topic. General comments (compliments, complaints, and otherwise) are best delivered here or expressed on your own personal Web site.
  4. And please, do not type in ALL CAPS. It looks like you're screaming at people.

Additionally, within Baptist polity, please recognize that many issues and decisions are addressed at a local church level. SBC denominational (national) offices have no control and desire no control over the activities of a local church. This entity is not responsible for overseeing and insuring the ethical behavior of Southern Baptist pastors or church members. If your concern involves a legal civil or criminal matter, we suggest you contact the proper local officials.

Issues involving pastoral staff or other church members, local Baptist associations or state Baptist conventions are local issues. Therefore the Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission cannot and should not address such issues. While we regret we are unable to assist you, we encourage you to seek a biblical resolution of the issue at the local church level. If your question or submission pertains to a matter covered in this text, it is likely we will not acknowledge your submission.

Other than that, we welcome you and hope to see thoughtful discussions at ERLC.com