Artificial Reproduction a “Grave Moral Evil” Says Archbishop Burke

Life Site News ^ | 10.06.06 | Hilary White

[Coleus]

ST. LOUIS, October 6, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com) – For the first time, a Catholic bishop in the US has come out with a strong statement clarifying the Church’s teaching on the practice of donating, or sometimes selling, human ova for medical research. Archbishop Raymond Burke of St. Louis, a strong advocate for life and family, has published a pastoral letter in which he says unequivocally that the removal of ova for artificial reproduction, including cloning, is a grave moral evil.

Referring to an upcoming ballot initiative to amend the state constitution, Archbishop Burke warned that the push to create cloned human beings for medical research not only necessarily takes the lives of innocent human beings, but also exploits women in the process.  He wrote, “Human cloning requires the harvesting of eggs from women who are exploited to accomplish the purposes of its proponents. As Christians, we must address the immorality of such exploitation.”  “The woman who subjects herself to the harvesting of her eggs for human cloning participates in a grave moral evil, the artificial generation of human life.” Burke said.

That the Catholic Church unequivocally condemns all artificial means of reproduction, as well as abortion and contraception, is one of her best-kept secrets. Pro-life advocates have long struggled to bring to light the fact that the source of much of the so-called “stem cell controversy” is that IVF and its related procedures are themselves violations of human dignity.   Burke tells his readers that the ballot measure, called Amendment 2, contains deceptive language and although it is presented as a ban on cloning, it actually protects the practice.

“In fact,” says Burke, “it gives the constitutional right to clone human beings.” “Women will be asked to cooperate in the process without the necessary explanation of the moral implications of their cooperation.” Burke says plainly: “The natural moral law prohibits any woman from cooperating in the act of human cloning.”

He warns that the process involved in creating human clones makes not only the clone but the woman into a “commodity” to be bartered in the scientific world. Calling the process “dehumanizing,” Burke says, “The great gift of fertility in a woman, the natural production of the human egg for reproduction, now becomes an object for manipulation by those who promote human cloning.”  "A woman’s cooperation in the twin evils of human cloning and the destruction of human embryos for the sake of the harvesting of stem cells is never justified.”

The Archbishop calls on his readers to consider “the grave moral crisis for our state and nation, which Amendment 2 represents, please give reflection to the moral and physical exploitation of women involved in human cloning for embryonic stem-cell research.”

Read the full text of Archbishop Burke’s letter:
http://www.stlouisreview.com/abpcolumn.php?abpid=11552

Read related LifeSiteNews.com coverage:
Barely Studied Risks of Egg-Donation Come Under Scrutiny
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2006/aug/06081106.html

[RightWhale]

The first in vitro baby is going on 30. This cleric's opinion is a little late to the game.

[Coleus]

Is it really wise for the Church to be in effect trying to limit the number of Christian babies born, as the civilized world faces ...>>

it's very wise to follow the laws of G-d. The Church encourages the conjugal act in the sacrament of marriage and procreation, there are over 1 billion catholics in the world so I think some are following the faith....

[ichabod1]

Like that woman in New York that found out she was having triplets so she had two of them aborted.

[ichabod1]

The church still does not approve of contraception, if that gives you a clew.

[ichabod1]

You don't think the fact of partial birth abortion doesn't prove the existence of the slippery slope? These people will be running embryo factories if they get a chance.

[Coleus]

The cleric is right on target. Pope Paul VI started writing about artifical means in reproduction in the 1960's, way ahead of the curve. Pope benedict wrote Donum Vitae in the 1980's, what are you talking about anyway? This article is about something new, human cloning, and something old, donating ova, did you read the article before you posted?

[RightWhale]

did you read the article before you posted?

What does that have to do with anything?

[rzeznikj at stout]

There is the Natural Law ordained by G-d Himself. The Church has no authority to change these laws--only G-d can.

[ConservativeStLouisGuy]

Thanks for the post! Here's the FULL column by the Archbishop....

‘Be Not Afraid!’ - Archbishop Raymond L. Burke

Introduction

In the discussion of the proposed amendment to the Constitution of the State of Missouri, known as Amendment 2, on the ballot for this coming Nov. 7, a most important consideration is the exploitation of women, which it involves. As a shepherd of God’s flock, I am deeply concerned for all involved in the evils of human cloning and the destruction of the human embryo to harvest its stem cells. My first concern, of course, is for the most innocent and defenseless humans involved, namely the human embryos cloned through somatic cell nuclear transfer. 

I am also deeply concerned for the women who are necessarily involved in the process of human cloning. In order to perform human cloning or somatic cell nuclear transfer, scientists must first procure human eggs from which to remove the nucleus, in order to replace it with the nucleus of a somatic or body cell of the donor with whom the cloned human will be identical. Human cloning requires the harvesting of eggs from women who are exploited to accomplish the purposes of its proponents. As Christians, we must address the immorality of such exploitation. 

Cooperation in grave moral evil

The woman who subjects herself to the harvesting of her eggs for human cloning participates in a grave moral evil, the artificial generation of human life. The many deceptions involved in the language of Amendment 2 — for example, the statement that it bans human cloning when, in fact, it gives the constitutional right to clone human beings — should make us realize that women will be asked to cooperate in the process without the necessary explanation of the moral implications of their cooperation. 

The natural moral law prohibits any woman from cooperating in the act of human cloning. It also prohibits her from taking part in a process that results in the killing of a human being at the embryonic stage of development. A woman’s cooperation in the twin evils of human cloning and the destruction of human embryos for the sake of the harvesting of stem cells is never justified. 

Inherent danger to women

Another moral question involves the danger to which the woman exposes herself. In order to produce the volume of eggs needed for cloning, women are given strong hormonal treatments to stimulate their ovaries to produce an unnatural number of eggs. The same drugs are administered to women who are undergoing certain treatments for infertility. From their experience, we know that a percentage of women will develop ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome, which is most painful and can even result in death. 

In order to harvest the eggs, the woman is placed under anesthesia. The harvesting process itself involves serious risks for the woman. After the harvesting of the eggs, some women have remained irreversibly sterile. Another study indicates that hyperstimulation of a woman’s ovaries can lead to stillbirths and defects at birth in her future pregnancies. 

It should not surprise us that the artificial stimulation of woman’s ovaries has other serious side effects. The human body is not a machine but a living organism. When we manipulate the organism to do what we want, instead of what nature does, we damage the organism and introduce disease into it. Hyperstimulation for the purpose of obtaining an unnatural production of eggs in a woman can lead to damage of the liver, kidney failure, blood clots and stroke. Some studies have also linked the drugs used for hyperstimulation with ovarian cancer. 

Woman becomes a commodity

Apart from the serious danger to which human cloning or somatic cell nuclear transfer subjects a woman, it also makes her a commodity to be used for the purposes of the scientific research of a few and their eventual large financial profits. The great gift of fertility in a woman, the natural production of the human egg for reproduction, now becomes an object for manipulation by those who promote human cloning. The whole process is dehumanizing for the woman. The abuse of women by Woo-suk Hwang, the South Korean researcher whose fraudulent claims to have cloned human embryos were recently uncovered, are eloquent testimony of the grave moral and physical dangers to women, which human cloning involves. 

As archbishop, I am deeply concerned for the poor and young women who may be attracted to egg donation, in order to obtain money to pay debts or put food on the table. As Dr. Pia de Solenni of the Family Research Council observed: "In the name of science, the industry will literally have its hands inside the bodies of hundreds of millions of poor, disadvantaged women." Reflecting upon the Golden Rule, we ask: Would we want our mother, our sister, our wife or our daughter to become the object of egg donation? 

Further reflection

In considering the grave moral crisis for our state and nation, which Amendment 2 represents, please give reflection to the moral and physical exploitation of women involved in human cloning for embryonic stem-cell research. If you wish further information, I recommend to you the booklet, "Women’s Voices against Cloning: Exploiting Women in the Name of Science," available through the archdiocesan Respect Life Apostolate. The Web site, www.handsoffourovaries.com gives strong voice to the grave implications of human cloning for women. 

I also recommend to you the blog of Chelsea Zimmerman of Holts Summit, Mo., reflection sofaparalytic.com. She is a quadriplegic as a result of a spinal cord injury sustained in an automobile accident when she was a junior in high school. Her reflections are an eloquent testimonial to the Gospel of Life and a true help to anyone who wants to understand the profound moral implications of Amendment 2, especially for women.

I ask you to continue praying the rosary for safeguarding embryonic human life. In your prayer, also ask our Blessed Mother to protect all women from the grave harm of cooperation in human cloning.

[ConservativeStLouisGuy]

...as well as a link to the column:

"Be Not Afraid!"

[cpforlife.org]

Pro-Life PING

Please FreepMail me if you want on or off my Pro-Life Ping List.

[Mrs. Don-o]

"While I'm leery of the cloning, I can't agree with opposing IVF. Without it, I wouldn't have six nieces and nephews."

Npbody's against these six children. The point, though, is that there are some ways to procreate children which are right, and other ways which are wrong.

Just as an example, children can be conceived via out-of-wedlock intercourse, prostitution, baby-selling schemes, and other means which most people would agree are immoral. The children are still dear and their lives are still sacred, but they were brought into being in a way which falls short of their dignity as human beings, not commodities or biological laboratory products.

[little jeremiah]

Moral Absolutes Ping.

The companion piece to the one I just pinged out.

MY needs, MY wants, MY desires! That's all that's important. ME ME ME! I deserve - I want - I must have. IOW, "I am God". Our position is that we don't always get what we "want" but hey - the funny thing is that sometimes what we "want" and what we need are two different things.

The concept of ownership over human beings is atrocious. People condemn slavery, and a lot of artificial conception is just that. With life and death control over the slaves. I mean "children".

Freepmail wagglebee and/or little jeremiah if you want on/off this pinglist.

[metmom]

They have a unique set of human DNA that sets them apart from every other person on the planet from conception. That DNA in that one celled fertilized egg is the same they'll die with; it defines them as a person. So why not consider a human human from conception?

The only possible reason anyone can possibly have to question the humanity of a baby from conception is so that they can kill it without any guilt or ethical or moral consequences (so they think). If it's not human, it's not murder so let's label it as *not human* so that we can *dispose of it* in any way we see fit. Murder by any other name...

[metmom]

I'm saying the nervous system is the interface between the person -- the soul -- and the machine -- the body.

If the nervous system is the interface between the sould and body, it doesn't mean that the soul doesn't yet exist. That fertilized egg is dividing and growing. It's alive and distinctively human. Intentionally stopping the growth of any human being is murder.

[.30Carbine]

Thank you for this ping and the other related ones I find in my inbox this morning! Yesterday afternoon I came across a 3x5 card at my desk that I hadn't seen in a while, and it so well fits right here:

We think we can create life in the laboratory
(actually all we do is bring
the component pieces into contact with each other
and measure the miracle)...
~Dr. Bernard Nathanson, The Hand of God, Regnery, 1996, p. 150.

[Jaded]

He's probably had the same opinion for a long time. Back when Louise Brown was born, many, many Protestants took issue with IVF. At the time, a friend informed me that any child conceived outside of the womb had no soul.

[trisham]

That the Catholic Church unequivocally condemns all artificial means of reproduction, as well as abortion and contraception, is one of her best-kept secrets

****************

It's hardly a secret.

[Jaded]

Short story: A former co-worker had 3 children. The oldest when she was 16. Until she got married at 29 she used artifical contraception. After she got married she couldn't get pregnant. After a time, her second child was conceived with the help of chemicals.

When she decided to have her next child she had to have IVF. At the time her doctor told her she still might not be able to conceive even with IVF as there were several issues working against each other. She was determined to have another child AT ANY COST.

So when her third child was a year old she was on the pill to regulate her cycle because her doctor told her she wouldn't be having anymore kids anyway, with or without IVF or other chemicals. She is pregnant and due in a few weeks. When she told me about baby number 4 she said that she realized that God gave her her fertility back. After this baby is born she's having her tubes tied. Hmmmm.

[austinrepub]

You're right about the "demographic time bomb," but Catholics are probably the best defense against that. The Natural Family Planning practiced by many faithful Catholics, including my wife and me, may very well help to prevent the onslaught of the peace-loving Mohammedens in this country. And I think that is the beauty and brilliance of Archbishop Burke's consistent message.