Posted on 01/08/2005 6:23:37 AM PST by Ed Current
Pro-life women took their families to Washington, D.C., to show congressional liberals that frozen embryos are human after all.
Most credible scientists will admit that an embryo is a human being, with all of the DNA and chromosomes that a human being will ever need from birth to death.
But some researchers and lawmakers don't want you to know that. Because they want you to think it should be legal to use federal funds to destroy this human being—so small that it is nothing more than a "dot," claimed one U.S. Senator—to help cure diseases like multiple sclerosis and Parkinson's. This sort of spin has convinced a majority of Americans to support embryonic stem cell research (ESCR)—in which a human embryo is destroyed while its stem cells are harvested.
But just in case you're still a little squeamish with the idea, advocates are helpfully avoiding language that gives any hint of an embryo's humanity. So we can expect to hear less and less about "embryos" and more about "dots" as Congress prepares to vote on a bill that would lift President Bush's August 2001 ban on federal funding for ESCR.
It might be easy for pro-life citizens who don't want their tax dollars supporting the destruction of human life to feel discouraged as this debate unfolds. Because it may seem difficult for embryos that look like microscopic masses to compete with emotionally compelling people pleading for cures.
They can take heart, however, because pro-life moms are walking the halls of Congress. And they're cutting through all that emotional hype by showing politicians the faces of the embryos they're proposing to kill. 'They Want to Kill Her'
One of those faces belongs to Mikayla Tesdall, a bouncy 3-year-old girl with blond pigtails who loves to sing worship songs to whoever will listen.
Mikayla is a Snowflake—the name given to six dozen adopted babies who began life as frozen embryos. Not too long ago, these crawling, talking toddlers were stored in the freezers of in-vitro fertilization clinics across the country. They were labeled by many politicians as mere "excess," worthy of destruction, until the Nightlight Christian Adoptions agency in California devised a way to rescue them by allowing infertile married couples to adopt them. Thus began an amazing process, in which Mikayla's adoptive mother, Sharon, had the little girl implanted in her womb as an embryo.
At press time at least another 20 Snowflakes—so-called because, like their namesake, they were once frozen and no two are exactly alike—were expected to be born by May 2005.
The perspective of the mothers who bore these miracle babies—who lovingly tracked each stage of their growth, from the first heartbeat, to the first ultrasound images of their fingers and toes, to the first cry outside the womb—is worlds apart from the perspective of the Washington politicians they hear on TV.
In fact, it makes her downright angry, Sharon Tesdall told Citizen, when she hears those politicians discussing embryos as if they're just collateral damage, expendable in the name of "progress."
"It makes me just irate. Irate," she said. "The lies are being perpetuated and told so slickly that nobody has a clue. … Because they're talking about Mikayla. They are talking about how she began, and they want to kill her.'
"You just can't dispute that truth, you know," she added, "after watching that embryo grow inside you. I experienced that truth."
And that personal experience has transformed Tesdall and other formerly apolitical moms into passionate pro-life warriors. They've been surprisingly effective, gaining access to places even some of the slickest lobbyists can't get into, like the White House. That's because every elected official recognizes the danger of angering moms trying to protect children.
So when 10 Snowflake moms descended on Capitol Hill last September, national leaders of both parties met with them, including President Bush's top aides, who presented their children with boxes of "White House Crayons."
But these moms didn't come just for the souvenirs or a glimpse of the West Wing; they had a singular mission in mind: presenting Democrats and Republicans alike with undeniable proof that a human being is sacred and worth protecting at any stage—whether an embryo or a fully developed baby.
"What I had transferred inside me was a life," Tesdall said. "And it's because I love my child that I have to speak for those without voices—the other embryos." 'We Added Nothing'
Despite her passion, though, going to Capitol Hill was a frightening experience for Tesdall. "This is not a comfortable thing for me. I'm not a speaker. I'm not even the kind of person who likes getting on a plane by myself with my daughter," she told Citizen, laughing. "At first, I just wanted to have a baby. I didn't want to be a political spokesperson. But then God did a 180 with me."
She didn't change her mind about political involvement overnight. It was a long process—nine years to be exact. Nine years of struggling with a diagnosis of infertility, and of wrestling with God over His decision to take away her "right" to have a child.
"What did I do, God?" Tesdall remembers silently asking when doctors announced the diagnosis. "Why me? What did I do to deserve this?"
"I thought I was a good girl, I never rebelled, you know," said Tesdall, who grew up in a traditional, Christian home. "It was the whole 'I deserve so much' kind of thinking. And this was a big lesson for me—the realization of the honest truth that I deserve nothing. That it is by the grace of God that I have the blessings I have.
"And I came to the point in my life of saying, 'Lord, this is the thing I want more than anything else, but I want you more than I want this child,' " she told Citizen, crying a little as she spoke.
Though painful, it was that very act of spiritual surrender, Tesdall said, that ultimately led her to the tiny embryo who would become Mikayla—and prepared her heart to follow God into another area she would otherwise have avoided: political activism.
"God taught me through that process how to listen to Him … and I very clearly feel the presence of God and the Holy Spirit pointing me in this direction."
And that's how, on the muggy morning of Sept. 22, Tesdall and Mikayla found themselves behind a podium in a U.S. House press room.
"I am 2," Mikayla boldly announced to a roomful of reporters and legislators before her mother had a chance to speak. It was an unplanned moment, but no matter. The audience got the point: Mikayla is fully human and already full of self-will. As the little girl played at the foot of the podium with a princess tiara and plastic dolls, Tesdall told the room:
"No one questions that she is fully human today, so how can anyone disagree that she was fully human in her embryonic stage of development? After all, what did any of us adoptive moms, who have given birth to Snowflake babies, add to them? We added nothing—except love, nutrients and a warm place to grow."
But sadly, many do disagree. U.S. Senator Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, for one, claims to be staunchly pro-life. Yet he signed a letter in June, along with 57 other senators, asking President Bush to rescind his funding limits on ESCR.
Hatch claimed that the research would only affect "fertilized eggs that are going to be discarded anyway." After all, as Hatch once said, "life doesn't begin in a petri dish."
But his comments are misleading on two fronts. First of all, the very definition of "fertilization" is what happens when an egg and sperm join together to become a human embryo—so there's no possible way that an embryo could just be an "egg."
Which means, at best, that Hatch and other ESCR proponents are misinformed about basic biology.
Second, a survey of nationwide in-vitro fertilization clinics conducted by Rand, a legal and health research corporation, recently revealed that the "vast majority" of the 400,000 excess embryos in fertility clinics aren't going to be "destroyed anyway."
The numbers break down like this: 88 percent are "designated for future attempts at pregnancy." Of the remaining 12 percent, only 2.8 percent (about 11,000) are available for research. (The rest are already allocated for adoption or destruction or are being held for other purposes.)
Now add to that reality, according to the Rand report, the fact that only about 275 stem-cell lines could be created from those 11,000. It begs the question, why are liberals fighting so hard and spending so much money on political campaigns for such a miniscule outcome?
"Their real purpose," said Focus on the Family's bioethics analyst, Carrie Gordon Earll, "is to dehumanize week-old embryos and desensitize the public to the point that it will accept the cloning of human embryos for research. 'Look into the Eyes'
"That's the next step."
Suzanne Murray and her husband were struggling with infertility when they heard about the Nightlight Snowflake program on a Focus on the Family radio broadcast. The couple had decided against in-vitro fertilization for fear extra offspring might be created that would one day be destroyed. So when they heard the broadcast, they jumped at the chance to rescue an already existing embryo and, at the same time, fulfill their lifelong desire for a child.
Not long after, they welcomed little Mary, who's now 15 months, into the world. "She fills hearts and arms that were so empty for so long," her mother told Citizen.
In fact, when Mary was implanted in her womb, Murray was so excited that she posted pictures of the embryo with the words "Suzanne's baby" on the walls of the hospital where she works as a nurse. Each week after that, she updated the pictures to reflect the development of Mary's limbs, heart rate and so on. Like Tesdall, Murray's personal knowledge of just how human an embryo really is motivated her to buy a plane ticket to D.C. for the press conference.
"People—even high-level congressmen—who claim to be pro-life are suddenly saying it's OK to destroy life if it's not yet in the womb," she said. "But it's a life, whether it's in the womb or in the petri dish."
After the press conference, Tesdall and Murray joined other Snowflake parents in a single-file procession down the halls of Congress. The site of a dozen blue strollers accompanied by a police escort caused many congressmen and their aides to stop and stare.
That's because children, much less a whole line of strollers, are a rarity on Capitol Hill.
D.C. isn't exactly the most family-friendly place, as Tesdall and Murray will readily tell you. Getting toddlers into crowded subways, cramming strollers into the trunks of taxis as impatient drivers honk, and then unpacking and repacking diaper bags each time they went through a government-building security line was a harrowing experience.
Both moms are from the much slower-paced suburbs of Southern California. But they were strangers until they adopted embryos through Nightlight. And even then, they never planned on becoming a political tag team.
The catalyst that thrust them together was Proposition 71, a California initiative passed in November that will allow a taxpayer-funded, $6 billion bond issue (including interest) to bankroll human cloning and embryonic stem-cell research in that state.
When the women learned there would be a Sacramento hearing on the proposition, they traveled nearly two hours to get there—Murray by car, Tesdall by train.
After waiting three hours to speak, Tesdall stood before her state legislators and pointed at Mikayla. "Look into the eyes of an embryo," she said. "This is my child." Her heart fell, she said, when she saw that many of the legislators were eating their lunches, chatting with one another, and basically ignoring her. Murray said she incurred a similar reaction.
But rather than discourage the women, "the hearing, if anything, kind of enraged our passion," Murray said. "I was like, you know what? I am going to get the truth out, if I have to speak on the tallest hill I can."
That turned out to be Capitol Hill. One week later, Murray and Tesdall boarded a plane to D.C. For three days, they shared hotel rooms, meals and taxis—and yelled timely encouragements to one another when crossing streets.
"God has a reason, Sharon!" Murray shouted to Tesdall over the noise of traffic and police whistles as the women made their way through a busy intersection. They had just left the office of Congressman Jim Gerlach, a Republican who was wavering in his stance against ESCR.
At first, when Tesdall and Murray entered his office with another Snowflake mom from his Pennsylvania district, Gerlach equivocated, claiming that many "people in my district believe [ESCR] is appropriate."
"Those in the scientific field say gains are being made," he added.
Then, as if on cue, Tesdall and Murray moved directly in front of his desk, standing side by side, inches from his face. They were determined that, this time, they weren't going to be brushed aside by an elected official who's accountable to voters.
"But those scientists who told you that are the same ones asking you for money," countered Murray.
"That's what you should be doing," the Congressman shot back, offering to push for grants to promote more Snowflake adoptions. But Tesdall and Murray refused to take the bait.
"We are not here to ask you for money, we are here to ask you to vote [not to rescind Bush's funding limit]," insisted Murray. "We would just like to see that these children are not dissected and destroyed; that's our main thing." 'I Still Believe'
It's 4 p.m., and Mikayla's tired. After a full day of visiting legislators in her stroller, she's sucking her thumb and leaning with eyes half closed against her mother as their taxi heads back to the hotel. Her mother, however, is finding it more difficult to wind down. She's still reeling from the conversation with Gerlach.
"He was being very polite," Tesdall says. "But you know what? His politeness is going to cost lives. Because when it comes to death, there is just no pretty way to package it."
[When Citizen asked Gerlach to respond, his office sent the following written statement from the congressman:
"While I support federal dollars being used for stem cell research, I've never advocated or supported federal funding of research on an unlimited number of stem cell lines. President Bush set aside a limited number of lines for research. And, over the course of time, some of those lines have become unusable. What I explained to the Snowflake parents during our meeting was that I support replacing the unusable lines and expanding the number available for research back to the initial limits established by the president while maintaining that limit in the future.
"Although the Snowflake parents have valid concerns, there's another point to consider in this debate on stem cell research. There will always be parents who, for whatever reason, will never want their embryos used for adoption and otherwise those embryos will be destroyed with or without a change in federal policy."]
Nevertheless, the very next day Tesdall and Murray are at it again, weaving their strollers in and out of legislators' offices. One stop is the office of their own California senator, the notoriously pro-abortion liberal Barbara Boxer.
Mikayla, who hasn't learned yet she's supposed to be afraid of liberals, is one of the first to speak when Boxer approaches. "This is me," the toddler proudly announces, pointing to a picture of herself as an embryo. "That is amazing," Boxer responds politely.
Of course the senator, who openly supports ESCR, doesn't convert on the spot. But neither does she turn down a photo op with the Snowflakes, even hugging and kissing a few of them.
Tesdall and Murray aren't disappointed, though. Because they recall how long it took for their own hearts to be softened by God's conviction. And that helps them understand that the battle to save lives won't be won overnight—it may happen one conversation, one changed mind at a time.
"Even if a legislator who supports [ESCR] just sees and remembers the faces of our children before they go to sleep at night, then we've accomplished something," Murray told Citizen.
"We're moms, not politicians," Tesdall said later, adding that, "I still believe in the roots of this nation. It was common people that came together and fought for this nation, for freedom and for life. And what are we? Like them, just common people. Just common moms."
Take action: Call your U.S. congressman and urge them to vote against the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act of 2004. For contact information, visit www.citizenlink.org
But, there are clouds on the horizon and they were visible during the full Platform Committee meeting. Cathie Adams who, along with Kelly Shackleford, represented Texas on the Platform Committee, offered an amendment banning research that involves the killing of human embryos. She felt it was important to raise the issue and debate it this year so that the public would know that pro-life Republicans are not satisfied with current administration policy on embryonic stem cell research. But, because an estimated 75% of the Committee members were Republican officials of some sort, the Bush campaign exerted almost absolute control so that nothing went into the Platform that they didn’t approve. And they did not want the Party on record in support of a total ban. Senator Bill Frist of Tennessee who chaired the Committee managed to table the amendment so that no debate could take place. In addition, he made a 15 minute speech about stem cell research, making clear his position that embryonic stem cell research must continue and be expanded, albeit without federal funding.
Make no mistake about it. 2008 could turn into a real donnybrook over the fate of the human embryo. Whether the human embryo will be respected and protected under the law as a human subject is, without a doubt, the linchpin of the pro-life cause. The United States must ban any scientific experiments that involve the killing of human beings at their earliest stage of development. The funding issue is irrelevant. The morality of killing living human embryos is not determined by who pays for it. Germany has imposed such a ban because they remember Nuremberg. So should we. The pro-life cause has met its ultimate challenge. If the tiniest humans can be killed to benefit others, no one is safe. Because of this, we are re-dedicating RNC/Life to our mission of holding Republican candidates and office-holders accountable to pro-life principles and we will work even harder to complete the Plank in 2008 by adding language calling for a ban on killing human embryos.
Please consider this an appeal to you from a fellow former embryo for your help and support as we pursue our goal of legal protection for every innocent human life.
After all, "A person’s a person, no matter how small."
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. --
We, therefore, the Representatives of the United States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions…. --And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor. NARA | The National Archives Experience
Jefferson & Paul agree that the fundamental purpose of government is to secure rights granted by God by punishing evil and he discovers that it does 'outside the abortion context.'
Are politicians aware that they were once just a "DOT" ?
This is obscene. I think that freezing of embryo's should be banned and language needs to be changed when referring to human life.
It's basically scientists fault for using terminology such as "embryo", "fetus" and now add "Dot". Correct terminology is a "baby" "Human life".
I never heard a pregnant woman refer to what was happening as having a dot or having an embryo, they always refer to their child as having a baby! And rightfully so.
I never heard a pregnant woman refer to what was happening as having a dot or having an embryo, they always refer to their child as having a baby! And rightfully so.
EXCELLENT comment!!!!
Look - everyone KNOWS they're human. It's not a question of are they-aren't they, it's a question of priorities for the lefties.
If babies and beginning life gets in the way of their ideas and agendas, they'll never accept or admit a group of cells is life. If the government gave them a lifetime salary and 24-hour child care for keeping their children instead of aborting them, they'd all be pro-lifers. Children, however, get in the way of free sex, and the gubmint gives money, but it's not enough. So, bye-bye babies.
We can only hope the next generation is paying attention to all the ridiculous liberal ideas that gave them divorced parents, unwanted children, crappy schools, and poor lifestyles. The next generation -if they're listening - are the ones who need this information and to act on it.
We can only hope the next generation is paying attention to all the ridiculous liberal ideas that gave them divorced parents, unwanted children, crappy schools, and poor lifestyles. The next generation -if they're listening - are the ones who need this information and to act on it.
Most adults admit that children do not get adequate spiritual and moral preparation in life, yet there is no aggressive or strategic effort being made to alter that unfortunate circumstance.
"Ultimately, children get neglected because parents rely upon everyone else to do their job for them," Barna stated. "The popular notion that ‘it takes a village to raise a child’ has become an accepted excuse for millions of parents to assign away the commitment for their child’s development.
There were also huge differences in moral viewpoints based upon a person’s generation. In nearly every case there was a pattern of Mosaics (the oldest members of the youngest generation, currently 18 or 19 years old) and Busters (those 20 to 38 years of age) being most likely to deem the behavior morally acceptable. Baby Boomers (ages 39 through 57) were less likely to buy into each behavior, and Elders (a combination of the two oldest generations, comprised of people 58 or older) emerged as the people least likely to embrace the behavior.
City Journal Summer 2000 | Animal Rights by Roger Scruton
This is not to say that traditionalist views on abortion are right and the views of liberals wrong. It is simply to point to the far-reaching social effect of a legal process that puts rights at the top of the agenda, and that encourages everyone, regardless of his social and moral standing, to sue for them. The long-term consequence will be to reduce majority values and life-styles to mere "options" among a range of socially valid alternatives, all of which will deserve equal respect from the law and equal subsidy from the exchequer. This is already happening with homosexual "marriage"; it will extend, in time, to many other forms of relationship, in obedience to the urgent desire of this or that section of society to free itself from "outmoded" burdens or to enjoy some previously forbidden pleasure. Euthanasia is currently a crime. It will soon be a right—a right for which relatives can sue, and which they will use with a clear conscience to put their old parents out of their misery.
Senator Frist is a proponent of killing embryos for their stem cells ... he's not pro-life, but he wants people to believe he is. Orrin Hatchling exhibits magic thinking, claiming an embryo in a lab isn't a human until it is placed inside a womb ... he's not pro-life, but he gets re-elected time and again by claiming to be pro-life. Is there a truly pro-life Republican in the House or Senate? Yes, a few, but mostly we have pretenders to pro-life, exploiting the ignorance of boters. Not much different from Democraps I'd say.
boters = voters ... my fingers don't have a cold.
ProLife Ping!
If anyone wants on or off my ProLife Ping List, please notify me here or by freepmail.
Great article, thanks for posting. BTTT!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.