Speaking at a Baptist church in Winter Park on Saturday, the former speaker received a standing ovation when he declared that embryonic stem-cell research amounts to “the use of science to desensitize society over the killing of babies.”
And in a news conference Sunday, he said he would ban all embryonic stem-cell research, including that done on discarded embryos created by in vitro fertilization.
Gingrich added that he would also create a commission to study the ethics of in vitro fertilization, which has involved the creation of hundreds of thousands of excess embryos stored or discarded by fertility clinics.
“I believe life begins at conception, and the question I was raising was what happens to embryos in fertility clinics, and I would favor a commission to look seriously at the ethics of how we manage fertility clinics,” Gingrich said at a news conference outside another Baptist church here. “If you have in vitro fertilization, you are creating life; therefore, we should look seriously at what the rules should be for clinics that are doing that, because they are creating life.”
Scientists say embryonic stem cells are valuable in research because they can develop into any type of cell in the body. They are thought to hold the promise to treat or cure a variety of illnesses and injuries. However, social conservatives oppose the practice, because it destroys days-old human embryos.
In 2001, when then-President George W. Bush was considering new guidelines for federal funding of stem-cell research, Gingrich had indicated in at least two interviews on Fox News that he would support using government money for research on embryos in fertility clinics that would otherwise be discarded.
“For many of us, there’s a very, very real distinction between doing something with an unborn child, a fetus that is implanted, and doing something with cells in a fertility clinic that are otherwise going to be destroyed,” Gingrich said in one of the interviews, on July 10, 2001.
In the other, 10 days later, he added: “I think that there are ways to have appreciation for life, to recognize the sanctity of life, but nonetheless to look at fertility clinics where there are cells that are sitting there that are not going to be used to create life. They literally today, they’re unregulated, they can be thrown away. And I think the president, I hope the president, will find a way to agree that there ought to be federally funded research.”
Bush allowed federal funds to be spent only on 21 stem-cell lines that existed before his August 2001 decision. President Obama lifted that restriction in 2009.
Romney opposes federal funding of embryonic stem-cell research but would not ban the use of stem-cell research on excess embryos in fertility clinics.
Another reason to dislike Newt, the flip flopper. The potential for stem cells to improve the quality of life is immense and limitless. Scientists hope to find ways to control Parkinson’s, Alzheimer’s, diabetes, some cancers, and many other diseases with the use of stem cells. Medical discoveries of this importance should not be held ransom by politics.
I am so tired of politicians trying to shove their religious beliefs down my throat I could scream. This issue and the right to die with dignity are two issues just waiting to boil over. Once the boomers all get to the magic age it might not be as easy to run over top of millions of voters who very much have a vested interest in both dying issues and stem cell research.
Meanwhile, Newt seems to be willing to say or do anything to get a vote. Critical medical and science issues should not be used for political gain. Not a week goes by that I don’t read or hear someone discussing the war on Christianity. There is no war on Christianity. People are tired of dealing with this kind of intrusive behavior. I am not sure why politicians are meeting in churches anyway. Time to put a stop to this practice also.
My wife and I struggled with the question of what to do with our remaining eggs for our 25,000 dollar IVF procedure.
We spent many days and weeks discussing it, agonizing over it and feeling generally stressed about it.
In the end we were very thankful to hear that no other eggs had matured to the point where we were given the option for them to be cryo-preserved. For us it was as if we were meant to have the two blastocysts that survived.
Today we call those blasto’s; Mia and Enrique.
Marin, thanks for sharing your very deeply personal involvement with part of this issue. How do you feel in general about politicians trying to alter laws about stem cell and in vitro?
Here is a question I had when I was putting up the thread. When Bush was Pres, the ban was only on government sponsored stem cell. Is Gingrich proposing what goes on in the private world of stem cell and in vitro? If you or your insurance is putting up the $$$ how can Gingrich or any other politician be involved?
He is simply desperate for votes.
Stem cells are complicated for me. I have nothing against science and I think that scientific exploration is worthwhile especially if on the back end it can save lives or make our lives better.
On the front end I don’t like the idea of eggs being produced solely for the purpose of being destroyed. If the eggs were produced and would otherwise be destroyed by the parents (yes, not owners but parents) and instead of destruction the eggs are donated to further science.. I think I see that no different than organ donation. (yes, an over simplification)
I would have difficulty seeing a valid governmental interest in this field of science and would leave it to the private market. So, I would disagree with Newt on regulating Big Pharma from this field.
As a father of IVF babies I also take issue with any proposed regulation of IVF medicine. To me the inability for a woman to become or maintain pregnancy is a medical issue plain and simple. If a woman has the financial means to do so (insurance or out of pocket) and a doctor that he thinks can make it happen – why should the govt interfere?
The process is already extremely stressful and the cause for many divorces (some women distraught with the idea of not being able to give a husband a child seek a divorce to free him from his marital obligation). I don’t think a valid governmental interest is made by adding more complexity to an issue that is already very complex, not inexpensive and not a very high chance of success.
I would say this ranks up with establishing a moon base. The idea itself is moonbatty.
@marin, I can’t find much to disagree with you on this subject. I haven’t been there so I don’t know how I would feel if it were my zygotes. I think I would probably not care but….I am not coming from the same place you are.