ARTICLES
DECEMBER 2004 ARTICLES
Contents © 2004
by Jim Holman.
All rights reserved.
We Failed
Majority of Catholics Supported Embryo Stem-Cell Measure
BY CHRISTOPHER ZEHNDER
The triumph of Proposition 71, the embryonic stem cell initiative, on November 2, was not surprising, at least for those who followed the pre-election polls. The proposition, which dedicates $3 billion in bond money to research on stem cells culled from embryos, won handily, 59 percent for, 41 percent against. What perhaps should be surprising is that it seems Catholics overwhelmingly supported the child-killing measure -- even though the bishops of California had publicly opposed it.
The progress of Proposition 71 to triumph over the past few months reads like a sad story. According to a poll conducted in August by the San Francisco-based Field Research Corporation, support for Proposition 71 led opposition by only three points. That margin grew to seven points in late September, and then to seventeen points in late October. According to the Field Poll released October 31, support for Proposition 71 among the general population was at 54 percent, with opposition at 37 percent.
The Field Poll results, it turns out, were not too far off the final vote results for the measure. This fact leads one to the depressing conclusion that the poll was not too far wrong about Catholic support for the proposition, either. According to the October 31 poll, while 50 percent of generic Protestants and 56 percent of "Born Again" Christians opposed Proposition 71 (with 10 percent and 7 percent undecided respectively), 61 percent of Catholics supported the proposition, only 28 percent opposed it, and 11 percent were undecided. If, under the best case scenario, the 11 percent undecided finally voted against the proposition, that would still leave only 39 percent of Catholics opposing the measure.
It is interesting that, according to the Field Poll, Catholics differed little in their support for Proposition 71 from those described as of "other religions" and "no religious preference." According to Field, 64 percent of members of "other religions" said they would vote yes on Proposition 71, 28 percent said they would vote no, while eight percent were undecided. Among those of "no religious preference," 63 percent said they would vote yes, 25 percent said they would vote no, while 12 percent were undecided.
Why did people say they would support Proposition 71? According to the October 31 Field Poll, 48 percent of those who said they would vote yes on the measure agreed with the statement, "we need more medical research/believe in medical advances." The next most popular reason (at 44 percent) was "to find cures for diseases/to help treat people and save lives."
Among those who opposed Proposition 71, a large minority, 44 percent, cited moral reasons. These were "oppose retrieving stem cells from embryos, aborted fetuses/am pro-life/anti-abortion" and "it's immoral, unethical/scientists shouldn't be playing God/violates God's law." Other anti reasons included "it's too expensive/state can't afford it/creates too much debt/oppose new bonds" and "oppose using public, tax money for this/let private industry pay for this."
But why did Catholics support and, possibly, vote in such large numbers for Proposition 71? In a September 17 statement, the bishops of California said the proposition "cannot be justified from an ethical perspective, since the embryonic stem cell research which it funds involves "drawing stem cells from an embryo," a procedure which "always directly kills that human embryo." The bishops taught, "killing human life is never justified even when the intent is to benefit other humans." The bishops even gave more practical reasons for opposition, namely that that embryonic stem cell research "promises what may not happen and is a financial boondoggle."
More locally, on October 29, the Los Angeles archdiocese's newspaper the Tidings published a statement by Cardinal Roger Mahony against the measure. The research the measure would fund, said Cardinal Mahony, involves stem cells "that will come from the destruction of embryos created by in vitro fertilization and from embryos created by a scientific process known as cloning. This cloning does not allow the new human being to be born, but rather, creates human life in order to use it for research on its stem cells. This is completely contrary to our moral teaching and our belief in the sanctity of every human life from the moment of conception to natural death." Further, said Mahony, "the Church's teachings on social justice lead us to conclude that it is both wrong and unjust to launch a costly new state bureaucracy when vital state programs for health care services, as well as education, police and fire services are being cut." Finally, said Mahony, Catholic "belief in the moral imperative of seeking the common good is at odds with this extraordinary expenditure on speculative research that will divert funds away from types of research, such as the use of non-embryonic sources of stem cells, like cord blood, that have already demonstrated success."
The same issue of the Tidings that carried Mahony's statement also had two other articles against Proposition 71, one by Lillibeth Navarro, who wrote that "as a disabled person who survived polio and cancer, I would not feel right were these tiny babies mutilated and manipulated for the remote or even immediate possibility that I might walk someday." The second article, by Valerie Cronn, noted, "Proposition 71 will institute de facto slavery. No euphemisms can hide the fact that what is being proposed is nothing less than the wholesale manufacture of thousands, perhaps even millions, of defenseless human beings who will be bred to bring money and fame to a few." The October 22 Tidings also carried an article detailing a talk by Sulpician Father Gerald Coleman opposing stem-cell research.
So why did so many Catholics say they supported Proposition 71? Why did they ignore the Church's clear opposition to the measure? The answer is uncertain; but the Field Poll, if correct, may well shed an unwelcome light on the real state of the Catholic Church in California.