Posted on 12/04/2011 2:29:55 PM PST by Clint N. Suhks
In an interview with ABC News on Friday, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich said he believes that human life does not begin at conception but at "implantation and successful implantation" because if you say life begins at conception "you're going to open up an extraordinary range of very difficult questions."
Gingrich also said that his "friends" who take "ideological positions" that human life does begin at conception "don't then follow through on the logic of" that postion.
Gingrich's statement was criticized by Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.), who like Gingrich is seeking the Republican presidential nomination, and by commentaries posted on pro-life websites.
Gingrich made his statement in an interview with ABC News's Jake Tapper in West Des Moines, Iowa.
"Abortion is a big issue here in Iowa among conservative Republican voters and Rick Santorum has said you are inconsistent," Tapper told Gingrich. "The big argument here is that you have supported in the past embryonic stem cell research and you made a comment about how these fertilized eggs, these embryos are not yet 'pre-human' because they have not been implanted. This has upset conservatives in this state who worry you don’t see these fertilized eggs as human life. When do you think human life begins?"
Gingrich responded: "Well, I think the question of being implanted is a very big question. My friends who have ideological positions that sound good don't then follow through the logic of: 'So how many additional potential lives are they talking about? What are they going to do as a practical matter to make this real?
"I think," Gingrich continued, "that if you take a position when a woman has fertilized egg and that's been successfully implanted that now you're dealing with life, because otherwise you're going to open up an extraordinary range of very difficult quesitons."
Tapper then asked: "So implantation is the moment for you?
"Implantation and successful implantation," said Gingrich.
"In addition," said Gingrich, "I would say that I've never been for embryonic stem cell research per se. I have been for, there are a lot of different ways to get embryonic stem cells. I think if you can get it in ways that do not involve the loss of a life that's a perfectly legitimate avenue of approach.
"What I reject," Gingrich told Tapper, "is the idea that we're going to take one life for the purpose of doing research for other purposes and I think that crosses a threshold of de-humanizing us that's very, very dangerous."
Wesley J. Smith, who authors a blog about bioethics on the website of First Things, posted an entry on Saturday that was sharply critical of Gingrich's statements to Tapper.
Smith pointed to an embryology textbook he had quoted in his own book, Consumer's Guid to a Brave New World.
"If we want to learn the unvarnished scientific truth about whether an early embryo--wherever situated--is really a form of human life, we need only turn to apolitical medical and embryology textbooks," Smith wrote.
"For example," wrote Smith, "the authors of The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology (6th Ed.) assert: 'Human development is a continuous process that begins when an oocyte is fertilized by a sperm...' The fertilized egg is known as a zygote, which 'is the beginning of a new human being ...' More to the point, the authors write: 'Human development begins at fertilization' with the joining of the egg and sperm, which 'form a single cell called a zygote. This highly specialized ... cell marks the beginning of each of us a unique individual.'"
Rep. Bachmann put out a statement on Friday, expressing disagreement with what Gingrich had told ABC News.
“Newt Gingrich stated today that life begins at implantation not at conception," said Bachmann. "But those who are truly involved in the life issue know that life begins at conception. Additionally, the former speaker’s description of the life issue as 'practical' is a rejection of the most sacred principle that each and every life has value, a principle recognized by our founders in the Declaration of Independence of the most basic right with which every human is endowed. This along with his inconsistent record on life is just one more indication that Newt is not dedicated to protecting the lives of the unborn and doesn’t share the most basic of conservative principles."
Give it a rest - unless you are prepared to award FReepers a medical degree in medicine with Board Certification in ObGyn.
Think ectopic pregnancy much?
Newt has been sitting a little to close on the couch with Pelosi.
Ultimately, one has nothing but one’s principles to stand upon, and the most central, fundamental, and basic bedrock principle that one could possibly rely upon, is that the very difficult questions are never even to be asked, let alone answered. According to some.
Looks like Newt will be the nominee. That makes me very nervous. Just like McCain he says a lot of the right things and I want to like him, then he tries to please everyone (see his immigration stance).
Truly a “nattering nabob of negativism” award finalist. Why does Michelle Bachman have to nitpick on even this? The average voter could care less. Crikey!
I think what NEWT is saying here is that if you fertilise a woman’s egg and place it in a freezer for 6 months , it isn’t a human life until it is implanted. Conception would come when it is implanted and not when it went in the freezer.
Not sure I don’t agree with him.
Nitpicking this is far too complicated an area for me, and I don’t know what the Catholic theologians have to say about it. Is it a human life when the egg is fertilised or when the fertilised egg is planted. There damn sure will not be life without implantation.
THAT is the point when 'it' becomes a 'who'.
Gingrich had no business joining the Catholic church if he doesn’t agree with Catholic doctrine. Perhaps he should just leave. And I don’t think he’ll make any friends in the pro-life community with this talk that life begins at implantation.
Its not difficult for those who oppose the morning after pill or embryonic stem cell research.
Life begins at conception, and viable life continues at implantation.
What is there to argue about?
I agree with you. With Newt as the nominee, even states such as mine, Indiana, will be back in play again for Obama.
Tell Newt that he is a CINO (Catholic in Name Only).
The Catholic Church teaches that life begins at conception.
“from the time that the ovum is fertilized, a life is begun that is neither that of the father nor the mother; it is rather the life of a new human being with his own growth.” (Evangelium Vitae 60, quoting Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration on Procured Abortion
The foundation for Catholic social thought is the proper understanding and value of the human person. In the words of Pope John Paul II, the foundation of Catholic social teaching “is a correct view of the human person and of his unique value, inasmuch as ‘man … is the only creature on earth which God willed for itself.’ God has imprinted his own image and likeness on man (cf. Gen 1:26), conferring upon him an incomparable dignity” (Centesimus Annus 11). In a sense, all Catholic social teachings articulate the ethical implications of a proper understanding of the dignity of the person
Personally, I am sick of this mamby-pamby approach. If you really stand for something as a candidate, then you should be able to defend it. Who the heck is he trying to be here? Mitt Romney?
Not only does the Catholic Church teach that life begins at conception, but so does science.
As soon as conception occurs, you have a person who is a) alive; b) different genetically from either the mother or father; and c) human.
It is contrary to science to pretend otherwise. The fetus isn’t dead and then suddenly comes alive. It is alive from the moment of conception.
Notice, too, that the reason Gingrich takes this position, apparently, is so he can support fetal stem cell research. Sorry, but that doesn’t fly. In the first place, it is using a human life in a Nazi kind of way. And in the second place, it has proven just about useless.
The ONLY reason to support fetal stem cell research is because you have friends in the business who want government pork to support their experiments.
California has spend billions which it doesn’t have to support fetal stem cell research. What has it gained? Absolutely NOTHING.
Life begins when you vote conservative. Newt is still in the prelife stage.
Life begins when you vote conservative. Newt is still in the prelife stage.
Notice, too, that the reason Gingrich takes this position, apparently, is so he can support fetal stem cell research.
Newt always has an excuse to take the liberal position.
The Catholic Church says life begins at conception and I agree. Newt disagrees with his Church.
Old practical Newt strikes again. Expediency trumps principle one more time.
FUNG!
http://www.equalprotectionforposterity.com/index.html
“I have often said we need to join in prayer to bring protection to the unborn. Prayer and action are needed to uphold the sanctity of human life. I believe it will not be possible to accomplish our work, the work of saving lives, ‘without being a soul of prayer.’ The famous British Member of Parliament, William Wilberforce, prayed with his small group of influential friends, the ‘Clapham Sect,’ for decades to see an end to slavery in the British empire. Wilberforce led that struggle in Parliament, unflaggingly, because he believed in the sanctity of human life. He saw the fulfillment of his impossible dream when Parliament outlawed slavery just before his death.”
“Let his faith and perseverance be our guide. We will never recognize the true value of our own lives until we affirm the value in the life of others, a value of which Malcolm Muggeridge says:. . . however low it flickers or fiercely burns, it is still a Divine flame which no man dare presume to put out, be his motives ever so humane and enlightened.”
“Abraham Lincoln recognized that we could not survive as a free land when some men could decide that others were not fit to be free and should therefore be slaves. Likewise, we cannot survive as a free nation when some men decide that others are not fit to live and should be abandoned to abortion or infanticide. My Administration is dedicated to the preservation of America as a free land, and there is no cause more important for preserving that freedom than affirming the transcendent right to life of all human beings, the right without which no other rights have any meaning.”
— President Ronald Reagan - Abortion and the Conscience of the Nation
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.