Catholic Ping - Please freepmail me if you want on/off this list
Posted on 10/18/2005 11:41:01 AM PDT by NYer
AUCKLAND, October 18, 2005 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Pro-life groups are roundly criticizing Auckland University scientists who are conducting research on eyes obtained from babies aborted in the US.
New Zealand’s Investigate magazine uncovered what it describes as “Auschwitz-style” experiments on aborted children at the university. Investigate reveals the university has been importing slices of aborted fetuses into New Zealand from America for the past 18 months, in what’s believed to be the first research of its kind in New Zealand.
The University said it approved the research led by Dr Keely Bumsted O'Brien, from the Optometry Department, on the basis of ethical approvals allegedly obtained in the United States, where the fetal body parts are being harvested at abortion clinics. Inquiries by Investigate suggest, however, that there are serious questions about the quality of the ethical approval process in the US. Bumsted O'Brien won a three-year grant worth $827,930 from the taxpayer-funded Health Research Council in May.
A Family Life International statement released Tuesday stated, “The research being conducted at the Auckland University on the remains of aborted foetuses is gravely immoral and it should be stopped immediately. The research that is being carried out on the remains of aborted children at Auckland University is gravely immoral and it can only lead to an even worse devaluing of human life.”
“The mentality that drives such experiments, that the ends justifies the means, is the exact same mentality that fuelled the horrific experiments carried out by Nazi doctors during the Second World War,” the FLI emphasized. “The purchasing of foetal remains, for any reason, turns abortion into a heinous money making exercise, and it further degrades the life of the baby that is lost to abortion and the mother involved.”
The university’s dead baby experiments are currently legal because fetal tissues are excluded from the Human Tissue Act, however new legislation expected in 2006 is expected to make it clear that consent of the mother is necessary before her baby’s remains be used in experiments. The new guidelines are being written by the National Ethics Advisory Committee.
Listen to an Investigate interview with Linda Tracy, the President of Advanced Bioscience Resources Inc, the organisation carrying out fetal body part harvesting in the US: http://www.investigatemagazine.com/ABRinterview.mp...
Catholic Ping - Please freepmail me if you want on/off this list
With all due respect to those who are upset by this, the tragedy lies in the death of the babies. By comparison, how their remains are handled after death is a rather petty issue.
I don't know why this would be more repulsive than the actual abortion.
I'm sorry but this just creeps me out.
Perhaps if there was not a market for aborted baby parts, there would be less reason to promote them.
>>By comparison, how their remains are handled after death is a rather petty issue.<<
I would agree with you if someone did not pay cash for those remains.
It makes a free market for death.
Here's a question for Miers and ALL SCOTUS appointees:
Explain the legal principle of Habeas Corpus.
It's like the Nazi doctors. Next they will be making lampshades out of them.
Liberals should have no ethical problem with this, as they have no problem with abortion. What a sick world we live in, where such practices occur.
We are told that babies are not aborted - only pre-matured tissue
How does one get eyes in a tissue?
....where the intel-LECK-tew-aal elite are publically pushing the idea that it's the "moral obligation" of parents to abort unborn babies who tests show may be born with Down's syndrome.
BUMP!
Coming soon: lampshades.
ping
Making money off murder is repulsive, I agree.
But it is not nearly as repulsive as the murder itself.
To take this point to its logical conclusion, I would prefer my body be treated with some dignity after I am murdered. But I would much more prefer that I not be murdered in the first place.
Of course pro-choicers are uncomfortable discussing this but you can't have it both ways. You can't on the one hand say the unborn baby has the moral equivalent of hamburger meat and on the other hand object to stuff like this.
At least with the pro-lifers they can be against both, the act of abortion and how the victim of abortion is treated afterwards. It is the pro-choice position that makes absolutely no sense.
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.