<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffcc" text="#000000">
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<br>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<img alt="" src="cid:part1.06030902.04000908@pfli.org" height="137"
width="887"><br>
<font color="#3333ff"><b><big><big><font face="Calisto MT">PharmFacts
E-News Update -- 6 Jan 2010 AD<br>
</font></big></big></b></font><span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: arial;"><font size="3"><font
color="#990000"><strong>This daily e-newsletter is only possible
through the generous gifts of our readers and supporters. Please help
us continue to fight for the defense of babies by donating
today!</strong></font><strong> </strong><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.pfli.org/shop/index1.html"><strong>Click
here</strong></a><strong><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.pfli.org/shop/index1.html">
</a><font color="#990000">to
help or to renew your dues online TODAY!</font></strong></font></span><br>
<hr size="2" width="100%"><font color="#3333ff"><big><big><font
face="Calisto MT"><small><small><font color="#000000"><br>
</font></small></small></font></big></big></font><big><b><small><a
href="http://www.pfli.org/shop/contents/en-us/d4.html"><blink>DONATE
TODAY....PFLI is relying on <i>you</i></blink></a></small></b></big>
<h3><font color="#000000"><small>Please help us carry on our apostolate
to help protect the innocent preborn and defend pharmacist rights of
conscience.
We also are pulling out the stops to raise extra funds for vitamins and
supplies for pregnancy help centers.</small></font></h3>
<h3><small><font color="red">Goal: $50,000; Donations received to
date: $1,455
</font></small></h3>
<small><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: arial;"><font size="3"><small><font
color="#990000"><strong>This (almost) daily e-newsletter is only
possible
through the generous gifts of our readers and supporters. Please help
us continue to fight for the defense of babies by donating
today!</strong></font><strong> </strong><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.pfli.org/shop/index1.html"><strong>Click
here</strong></a><strong><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.pfli.org/shop/index1.html">
</a><font color="#990000">to
help or to renew your dues online TODAY!<br>
</font></strong></small></font></span><strong><font color="#990000"><font
size="3"><small><br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://www.pfli.org/shop">If you have
not done so, NOW is time to
renew your commitment
for 2010 </a>to the preborn and the mission of PFLI by renewing your
membership in the ONLY pro-life association of pharmacists,
technicians, interns, students and the lay public. We rely solely on
the dues and donations of our members and supporters to continue this
apostolate of education and providing material assistance to pregnancy
help centers. Consider a two year renewal and save 10% over the annual
rate! Three year renewal enjoys a 15% discount! Do it today!<br>
<br>
We know the economy has been difficult for many families this year, and
non-profit volunteer organizations like ours are the first to feel
those effects. <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.pfli.org/shop">Can you send you
most generous gift this Christmas for your association? $5, $10, $25,
$50, $100?</a> <br>
<br>
No gift is too small or not gratefully appreciated! With your help, we
have dispensed tens of thousands of prenatal vitamins and supplies this
year to women with troubled pregnancies; help us to continue that
mission in 2010, as well as providing breaking news on our website
daily.<br>
<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://www.pfli.org/shop">Please do
this TODAY by clicking
this link!</a></small></font></font></strong></small><font
color="#3333ff"><big><big><font face="Calisto MT"><small><small><font
color="#000000"><small><strong><font color="#990000"><font size="3"><small><a
moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://www.pfli.org/shop"> </a>Thanks
and God bless you this Christmas and in 2010!</small></font></font></strong></small></font></small></small></font></big></big></font><br>
<hr size="2" width="100%">
<div align="center"><img src="cid:part2.02030408.00050905@pfli.org"
alt=""><br>
<br>
<img src="cid:part3.03000502.07060807@pfli.org" alt=""></div>
<font
style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"
color="#000000" face="Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif" size="2"><font
style="font-family: Verdana,Geneva,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"
color="#000000" face="Verdana,Geneva,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif"
size="3"><font
style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 14pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; color: rgb(153, 0, 0);"
color="#990000" face="Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif" size="4">2nd
Breast Cancer Scandal: National Cancer Institute Researcher Louise
Brinton Reverses Position, Finally Admits Abortion Raises Breast Cancer
Risk in Study that Fingers [Abortifacient] Oral "Contraceptives" as a
Probable Cause of
Triple-Negative Breast Cancer</font></font>
<div><small><font
style="font-family: Verdana,Geneva,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 8pt; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"
color="#000000" face="Verdana,Geneva,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif"
size="1"><small><font
style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt; font-style: italic; font-weight: normal; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"
color="#000000" face="Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif" size="2"><small><small><br>
Study is 9 months old, but still no warnings from cancer establishment</small></small></font></small></font></small></div>
<p><small> <span color="#000000"
face="Verdana,Geneva,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif" size="1"
style="font-family: Verdana,Geneva,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 8pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-weight: bold;"><font
style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"
color="#000000" face="Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif" size="2"><small>MEDIA
ADVISORY,</small></font></span> <span color="#000000"
face="Verdana,Geneva,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif" size="1"
style="font-family: Verdana,Geneva,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 8pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-weight: bold;"><font
style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"
color="#000000" face="Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif" size="2"><small>Jan.
6</small></font></span> /Christian Newswire/ -- Less than two months
since the U.S. Preventative Services Task Force issued new guidelines
recommending against routine mammograms for women in their forties, a
second breast cancer scandal involving a U.S. government panel of
experts has come to light which has implications for healthcare reform.
<br>
<br>
An April 2009 study by Jessica Dolle et al. of the Fred Hutchinson
Cancer Research Center examining the relationship between oral
contraceptives (OCs) and triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) in women
under age 45 contained an admission from U.S. National Cancer Institute
(NCI) researcher Louise Brinton and her colleagues (including Janet
Daling) that abortion raises breast cancer risk by 40%. [1]
<br>
<br>
Additionally, Dolle's team showed that women who start OCs before age
18 multiply their risk of TNBC by 3.7 times and recent users of OCs
within the last one to five years multiply their risk by 4.2 times.
TNBC is an aggressive form of breast cancer associated with high
mortality.
<br>
<br>
"Although the study was published nine months ago," observed Karen
Malec, president of the Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer, "the NCI,
the American Cancer Society, Susan G. Komen for the Cure and other
cancer fundraising businesses have made no efforts to reduce breast
cancer rates by issuing nationwide warnings to women."
<br>
<br>
Brinton was the chief organizer of the 2003 NCI workshop on the
abortion-breast cancer link, which falsely assured women that the
non-existence of the link was "well established." [2]
<br>
<br>
Dolle's team reported in Table 1 a statistically significant 40% risk
increase for women who have had abortions. They listed abortion among
"known and suspected risk factors." <br>
<br>
Brinton and Daling had previously studied this population from the
Seattle-Puget Sound area in the 1990s and reported risk increases
between 20% and 50% among women with abortions. [3,4] In the 2009
study, they and their co-authors wrote that their findings concerning
induced abortion, OC use and certain other risk factors, "were
consistent with the effects observed in previous studies on younger
women."
<br>
<br>
"Obviously, more women will die of breast cancer if the NCI fails in
its duty to warn about the risks of OCs and abortion and if government
funds are used to pay for both as a part of any healthcare bill," said
Mrs. Malec.
<br>
<br>
A brief <a
href="http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?et=1102923680531&s=16890&e=001hF4OKqYo9h33zMhuT4v0Xt3f3rmX1oS77MLbHIU6qlwmaGCmiTuGnp0BSsHc19aEoa6EeyW3BM44AN7w6t64tWvDpegbHWGM3Wc1jnRZ9AX-ZFevHZgcGHRvEASyYljWqrSqX4nZ0IpQnzpGtqd-p_-hugsW8SLCddo9O_6cs7a-pwZkFmCSAA==">analysis
of the study</a>, Dolle et al. 2009, was provided by Dr. Joel Brind,
professor of biology and endocrinology and deputy chair for biology at
Baruch College, City University of New York.
<br>
<br>
Last year, studies from Turkey and China also reported statistically
significant risk increases for women who had abortions. [5,6]
<br>
<br>
The Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer is an international women's
organization founded to protect the health and save the lives of women
by educating and providing information on abortion as a risk factor for
breast cancer.
<br>
<br>
References available online at
<a
href="http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?et=1102923680531&s=16890&e=001hF4OKqYo9h3P1Eh1m0NgM1id6z2R6z0ynkgV5kdqtf5pf-c7m_XzHhSQkqs-Kd0_Ah8xALN-CJG2T8wJEWDmihBrViUyK-CFlwtUraouzbIk6O3xY9cyfWN5OiKKNjbRFm0iy0M4TYKf0_nbyGth1t1y56JPVFaIxok-zinztxZCeQyVpDXChw==">www.abortionbreastcancer.com/press_
releases/100106/index.htm</a> </small></p>
<p> </p>
<font
style="font-family: Verdana,Geneva,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 7pt; color: rgb(153, 0, 0);"
color="#990000" face="Verdana,Geneva,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif"
size="1">
<p><font
style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; color: rgb(153, 0, 0);"
color="#990000" face="Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif" size="1"><a
href="http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?et=1102923680531&s=16890&e=001hF4OKqYo9h2zBSGLKo17YNNu-gNLfo8r8m1FiyRpLbxNMarrOcrifkjc96pn-2Qt6yJCfFHgUvFzv9QMYqVB4FtBVJGUehtbXn7VGEUowj_u1Ga-e6NZtUttzc-sLxB7">Christian
Newswire</a></font></p>
</font></font>
<hr size="2" width="100%"><font
style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"
color="#000000" face="Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif" size="2"><font
style="font-family: Verdana,Geneva,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 7pt; color: rgb(153, 0, 0);"
color="#990000" face="Verdana,Geneva,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif"
size="1">
<p><br>
</p>
</font> </font><a style="color: blue;"
href="http://www.google.com/url?sa=X&q=http://onmilwaukee.com/buzz/articles/archbishopgetstowork.html%3F21320&ct=ga&cd=y1XqW8VbiX8&usg=AFQjCNF-21GGmONNxFlqxf8DyWJ_P2cvYw">New
archbishop gets down to business</a><br>
<font size="-1"><font color="#666666">OnMilwaukee.com</font><br>
Listecki has come down hard in terms of moral teachings, saying it is
wrong for anyone -- including rape victims -- to use <b>emergency
contraception</b>. <b>...</b><br>
<a
href="http://news.google.com/news/story?ncl=http://onmilwaukee.com/buzz/articles/archbishopgetstowork.html%3F21320&hl=en"><font
color="green">
See all stories on this topic</font></a>
<br>
<br>
</font><a style="color: blue;"
href="http://www.google.com/url?sa=X&q=http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/jan/10010503.html&ct=ga&cd=y1XqW8VbiX8&usg=AFQjCNEzuhDJTD89rZn1r0rm9jYPsaIyug">San
Francisco Archdiocese Reinvestigates, Approves Pro-Abortion CCHD Grantee</a><br>
<font size="-1"><font color="#666666">Lifesite</font><br>
<b>...</b> Life League is a member) revealed the SFOP's strong support
for health care facilities that provide family planning and “<b>emergency”
contraception</b>. <b>...</b><br>
<a
href="http://news.google.com/news/story?ncl=http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/jan/10010503.html&hl=en"><font
color="green">
See all stories on this topic</font></a><br>
<br>
</font><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: arial;"><strong>Planned
Parenthood Clinic Listed on Jesuit University’s
Student Health Services Site <br>
</strong><a href="http://ss.all.org/link.php?M=18096&N=574&L=4038&F=H">http://www.ewtn.com/vnews/getstory.asp?number=99651</a><br>
<span style="font-size: 8pt;"><font color="#808080">EWTN<br>
</font></span>The web site of the Student Health Services office at
Loyola University New Orleans includes Planned Parenthood among its
list of
local clinics and offers a link to Planned Parenthood of Louisiana and
the
Misssippi Delta. The university’s web site also notes that students
who have taken the sociology department’s capstone course (Sociology
Internship/Practicum) “have interned at Planned Parenthood.”
<br>
<br>
<strong>Sebelius Praises Senate Health Plan's Abortion
Coverage<br>
</strong><a href="http://ss.all.org/link.php?M=18096&N=574&L=4037&F=H">http://www.ewtn.com/vnews/getstory.asp?number=99656</a><br>
<span style="font-size: 8pt;"><font color="#808080">EWTN<br>
</font></span>In a little-publicized interview given with the Feminist
blog, “BlogHer.com,” Health and Human Services Secretary
Kathleen Sebelius praised the language in the Senate version of the
health
care bill because it upholds publicly-funded abortion coverage.</span><br>
<font color="#3333ff"><big><big><font face="Calisto MT"><small><small><font
color="#000000"><br>
</font></small></small></font></big></big></font><a style="color: blue;"
href="http://www.google.com/url?sa=X&q=http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/jan/10010410.html&ct=ga&cd=4OKjbXFBmvY&usg=AFQjCNFBO6reaFLU1JhO9tAp5bnNmhXoGQ">Philippine
Bishops Issue “Catechism on Family and Life” for Upcoming Elections</a><br>
<font size="-1"><font color="#666666">Lifesite</font><br>
The bishops point the finger at politicians on the left who have
attempted to impose legislation to loosen restrictions on abortion, <b>contraception</b>
and to <b>...</b><br>
<a
href="http://news.google.com/news/story?ncl=http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/jan/10010410.html&hl=en"><font
color="green">
See all stories on this topic</font></a>
</font><br>
<hr size="2" width="100%">
<p><b>Pelosi: My Pro-Abortion Stance is
Consistent with Catholic Faith</b><a name="3"></a><br>
<br>
</p>
<p><small>By
Kathleen Gilbert</small></p>
<p><small>WASHINGTON, D.C., January 4, 2010 (<a
href="http://www.lifesitenews.com/">LifeSiteNews.com</a>) - In
defending
her pro-abortion views against the teachings of the Catholic Church in
late December, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a professed Catholic, argued
that restricting abortion amounts to a violation of women's free
will and is inconsistent with her Catholic faith.</small></p>
<p><small>Pelosi told
Newsweek's Eleanor Clift December 21 that she had "some
concerns" about the Catholic Church's positions on abortion and
homosexuality.</small></p>
<p><small>"I am a practicing Catholic, although
they're probably not too happy about that. But it is my faith,"
said the Speaker. "I practically mourn this difference of
opinion because I feel what I was raised to believe is consistent with
what I profess, and that is that we are all endowed with, a free will
and a responsibility to answer for our actions. And that women should
have that opportunity to exercise their free will."</small></p>
<p><small>Rep.
Pelosi also discussed her interaction with Church hierarchy over the
last-minute decision to include Hyde-amendment restrictions on federal
abortion funding in the House's health care bill in early
November. After a group of conservative Democrats signaled that
they would not support the bill without the abortion funding ban
sponsored by Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.), Pelosi turned to the U.S.
Conference of Catholic Bishops to negotiate adequate pro-life
language. Pelosi was ultimately forced to include the Stupak ban,
which was rejected in the later Senate version.</small></p>
<p><small>Pelosi maintained
that the bill's original abortion language, which segregated the
government-appropriated monies funding abortion, would have kept the
legislation "abortion neutral."</small></p>
<p><small>"I said to [one of
the cardinals] that I believe that what we are doing honors the
principles we talked about.... They said, 'We believe that it does
not,'" she said. "That's what the meeting was
about — to make our case. Clearly, the people at that table were
not willing to accept what we know to be a fact."</small></p>
<p><small>Asked
whether it was difficult for her to reconcile her faith with her public
life, the Speaker responded: "You know, I had five children in six
years. The day I brought my fifth baby home, that week my daughter
turned 6. So I appreciate and value all that they want to talk about in
terms of family and the rest."</small></p>
<p><small>She continued: "When I
speak to my archbishop in San Francisco and his role is to try to
change
my mind on the subject, well then he is exercising his pastoral duty to
me as one of his flock. When they call me on the phone here to talk
about, or come to see me about an issue, that's a different story.
Then they are advocates, and I am a public official, and I have a
different responsibility."</small></p>
<p><small>Pelosi's bishop, San Francisco
Archbishop George Niederauer, <a
href="http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/feb/09021809.html">reportedly
met </a>quietly with her last February in what Pelosi's spokesman
called a "cordial" exchange on the topic of
abortion. </small></p>
<p><small>Niederauer and 25 other U.S. bishops
publicly corrected Pelosi in August after she indicated in a Meet the
Press interview that historic Catholic Church teaching was unclear
about
the morality of abortion.</small></p>
<small><a
href="http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/printerfriendly.html?articleid=10010402">Print
this Story</a> | <a
href="http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/sendtofriend.html?articleid=10010402">Email
to a Friend</a> | <a
href="http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/viewonsite.html?articleid=10010402">View
Story on LifeSiteNews.com</a></small> <br>
<hr size="2" width="100%">
<div class="moz-text-html" lang="x-western"><font id="role_document"
color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2">
</font>
<div><font id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"> </font></div>
<div>
<p style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;" class="MsoNormal"><o:p><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font
face="Times New Roman" size="3">Printed with permission of the authors<br>
<br>
</font></font></o:p></p>
<p style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;" class="MsoNormal"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font
face="Times New Roman" size="3"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.lifeissues.net/writers/irv/irv_172responsetocondic.html">http://www.lifeissues.net/writers/irv/irv_172responsetocondic.html</a></font></font><o:p><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font
face="Times New Roman" size="3"> <br>
</font></font></o:p></p>
<p style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;" class="MsoNormal"><span style=""
lang="EN"><font id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial"
size="2"><a title="Back to the main page of this site."
href="http://www.lifeissues.net/"><span class="logo21"><span
style="font-size: 28pt; text-decoration: none;"><font color="#333399"
face="Georgia">Lifeissues.net:</font></span></span></a></font></span><span
class="logo31"><span style="font-size: 14pt;" lang="EN"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font
color="#333399" face="Georgia">clear thinking about crucial issues</font></font></span></span><o:p><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font
face="Times New Roman" size="3"> <br>
</font></font></o:p></p>
<p
style="margin: 12pt 0in; background: white none repeat scroll 0% 50%; text-align: center; -moz-background-clip: -moz-initial; -moz-background-origin: -moz-initial; -moz-background-inline-policy: -moz-initial;"
class="MsoNormal" align="center"><font id="role_document"
color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><a name="contents"><b><span
style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif'; color: rgb(153, 0, 51); font-size: 21pt;"
lang="EN">Irving and Kischer Responses to Dr. Condic's
[pseudo]"Science" in National Catholic Register Interview</span></b></a><b><span
style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif'; color: rgb(153, 0, 51); font-size: 21pt;"
lang="EN"><o:p></o:p></span></b></font></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><i><span
style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif'; color: black; font-size: 10pt;"
lang="EN">January 6, 2010 </span></i><i><span
style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif'; color: black; font-size: 10pt;"
lang="EN"><br>
<br>
</span></i><b style=""><span
style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"><font
size="3">Dr Dianne N Irving, MA, PhD<br>
</font></span></b><i><span
style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif'; color: black; font-size: 10pt;"
lang="EN">Former career appointed biologist/biochemist NCI/NIH, and </span></i><i><span
style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif'; color: black; font-size: 10pt;"
lang="EN"><br>
</span></i><i><span
style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif'; color: black; font-size: 10pt;"
lang="EN">Professor of the history of philosophy, and of medical
ethics </span></i><i><span
style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif'; color: black; font-size: 10pt;"
lang="EN"><br>
</span></i><i><span
style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif'; color: black; font-size: 10pt;"
lang="EN">Email: <a href="mailto:DNIrving@aol.com"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: blue;">DNIrving@aol.com</span></a>
</span></i><i><span
style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif'; color: black; font-size: 10pt;"
lang="EN"><br>
<br>
</span></i><b style=""><span
style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"><font
size="3">C Ward Kischer, PhD</font></span></b><i><span
style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif'; color: black; font-size: 10pt;"
lang="EN"></span></i><i><span
style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif'; color: black; font-size: 10pt;"
lang="EN"><br>
</span></i><i><span
style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif'; color: black; font-size: 10pt;"
lang="EN">Emeritus Professor of Cell Biology & Anatomy </span></i><i><span
style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif'; color: black; font-size: 10pt;"
lang="EN"><br>
</span></i><i><span
style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif'; color: black; font-size: 10pt;"
lang="EN">University of Arizona, College of Medicine </span></i><i><span
style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif'; color: black; font-size: 10pt;"
lang="EN"><br>
</span></i><i><span
style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif'; color: black; font-size: 10pt;"
lang="EN">Tucson, Arizona 85724 </span></i><i><span
style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif'; color: black; font-size: 10pt;"
lang="EN"><br>
</span></i><i><span
style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif'; color: black; font-size: 10pt;"
lang="EN">Email: <a href="mailto:cwkischer@yahoo.com"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: blue;">cwkischer@yahoo.com
</span></a></span></i><i><span
style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif'; color: black; font-size: 10pt;"
lang="EN"><br>
</span></i><i><span
style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif'; color: black; font-size: 10pt;"
lang="EN">Reproduced with Permission </span></i><b><span
style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif'; color: black; font-size: 11.5pt;"
lang="EN"><o:p></o:p></span></b></font></p>
<p style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;" class="MsoNormal"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><i><span
style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; color: rgb(0, 0, 153);"
lang="EN"><o:p><font size="3"> </font></o:p></span></i></font></p>
<p style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;" class="MsoNormal"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><i><span
style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; color: rgb(0, 0, 153);"
lang="EN"><font size="3"><small>[Note: The following responses to Dr.
Maureen Condic's "science" presented in her interview on "when human
life begins" with the National Catholic Register were written
independently, and sent to the NCR and related others. They are copied
here as sent. Such overtly erroneous "science" could be used to
"justify" human cloning, human embryonic stem cell research, human
reproductive genetic engineering, the use of abortifacients - whether
the early human embryo is sexually or asexually reproduced, in vivo or
in vitro. Such erroneous "science" needs to be identified, especially
for those with little or no scientific background. Dr. Condic's
interview follows at the end. - D.N. I. and CWK]</small> <o:p></o:p></font></span></i></font></p>
<div style="margin: 24pt 0in;" class="MsoNormal"><span style=""
lang="EN"><font id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial"
size="2"><font size="3">
<hr align="left" size="2" width="100%"></font></font></span>Publisher
and Editor in Chief<br>
NC Register <font color="#000000"><font size="3"><font face="Arial"><br>
</font></font></font>Father Owen Kearns, LC <br>
</div>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font size="3">Dear
Editor Kearns: <o:p></o:p></font></font></span></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font size="3">In
the issue of the NC Register, dated December 20th - January 2nd, an
article was posted dated December 14th, 2009 entitled: "When Human Life
Begins". It was written by Sue Ellen Browder. She interviewed Dr.
Maureen Condic, a faculty member at the University of Utah, School of
Medicine. <o:p></o:p></font></font></span></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font size="3">I
never cease to be amazed that when I see and read about this subject:
"When Human Life Begins", the wrong people have been sought after for
interviews and comments. Why is it that human embryologists are rarely
those interviewed? Dr. Condic is not a human embryologist. In this
particular article, she makes some profound errors and misstatements. <o:p></o:p></font></font></span></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font size="3">Dr.
Condic says "the first human cell" is a zygote. This is incorrect. The
term "zygote" identifies a cell formed about 24 hours after
fertilization. It is important to use this term correctly because many
events occur prior to 24 hours. <o:p></o:p></font></font></span></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font size="3">Dr.
Condic states that the zygote "is not a new individual". Oh, yes it is.
The analogy to a car is not useful. From the moment of first contact of
fertilization, everything in that new, individual life is changing,
until death, whenever that may occur. This involves all of the
characteristics of life: size, form, content, function and appearance,
etc. It's just that the rates of change vary, sometimes dramatically,
to the extent that anyone might not be so appreciated. You can't say
that about a car. Assigning relative values at any point is simply
arbitrary and not scientifically grounded. Therefore, at any time point
along the continuum of life there is a whole, integrated human life. <o:p></o:p></font></font></span></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font size="3">Dr.
Condic states that defining pregnancy at implantation "makes perfect
sense both medically and biologically". Wrong again! There are two
basic reasons why defining pregnancy at implantation is nonsense. 1.
Fertilization occurs, optimally, in the ampulla of the Fallopian tube
[the upper third]. During the 5 to 6 days it takes for the embryo to
arrive in the uterus, the mother is protecting and nurturing that
embryo. 2. During that 5 to 6 days journey, the embryo is continuing to
develop. Both of these activities are occurring during a pregnancy. <o:p></o:p></font></font></span></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font size="3">The
idea that pregnancy begins at implantation of the embryo into the
uterus was generated more than four decades ago. At that time there
were concerns about the actions of chemical contraceptives. Albert
Rosenfeld wrote in his book "Second Genesis" [1969], if chemical
contraceptives prevent implantation of the embryo into the uterus, some
may hold that constitutes abortion. "A way around this impasse has been
suggested by Dr. A. S. Parkes of Cambridge: Equate conception with the
time of implantation - a difference of only a few days". <o:p></o:p></font></font></span></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font size="3">The
question of "person" and "personhood" are not within my expertise. I am
a scientist. These are philosophical issues and, therefore, may be
arbitrary. Yet, as a scientist I view a "person" as a human being, and
an embryo as a human being from the first moment [first contact] of
fertilization. It seems to me that the issue of what leads to
fertilization is virtually never discussed: that is, sexual
intercourse, which leads to pregnancy. It appears that some women want
the pleasures of sexual intercourse without the attendant
responsibility of a possible pregnancy. If human rights were to be
considered for the embryo, perhaps some women would be more
discriminating in their activities leading up to the assignment of
rights for the new, individual human being. <o:p></o:p></font></font></span></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"><o:p><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font size="3"> </font></font></o:p></span></p>
<p style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;" class="MsoNormal"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><i><span
style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; color: rgb(0, 0, 153);"
lang="EN"><font size="3">With all good wishes, <br>
<br>
C. Ward Kischer, Ph.D. <br>
Emeritus Professor of Cell Biology & Anatomy <br>
Specialty in Human Embryology <br>
University of Arizona, College of Medicine <br>
Tucson, Arizona 85724 <br>
Email: </font><a href="mailto:cwkischer@yahoo.com"><span
style="color: blue;"><font size="3">cwkischer@yahoo.com </font></span></a><o:p></o:p></span></i></font></p>
<div style="margin: 24pt 0in;" class="MsoNormal"><span style=""
lang="EN"><font id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial"
size="2"><font size="3">
<hr align="left" size="2" width="100%"></font></font></span></div>
<p style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;" class="MsoNormal"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><i><span
style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; color: rgb(0, 0, 153);"
lang="EN"><font size="3">[The following on-line comment was sent by
Dr. Irving directly from the "comment" webpage for Dr. Condic's
interview with the National Catholic Register] <o:p></o:p></font></span></i></font></p>
<p style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;" class="MsoNormal"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><i><span
style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; color: rgb(0, 0, 153);"
lang="EN"><o:p><font size="3"> </font></o:p></span></i></font></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font size="3">I
was astounded to read in a Catholic news website article so much
scientific nonsense (Sue Ellin Browder's interview with Dr. Maureen
Condic on "When Human Life Begins", Dec. 20, 2009, at: </font><a
href="http://www.ncregister.com/site/article/19659/"><span
style="color: blue;"><font size="3">http://www.ncregister.com/site/article/19659/</font></span></a><font
size="3">). Where to begin? <o:p></o:p></font></font></span></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font size="3">(1)
As Dr. Condic has been advised before, she can't claim both that the
new human being begins at penetration of the oocyte, and also when the
zygote forms. Those are two very different points in time. Since 1942
the internationally grounded Carnegie Stages of Early Human Embryonic
Development - the "gold standard" of human embryology - makes it
perfectly clear that in SEXUAL human reproduction the new human being
begins to exist at first contact of the sperm and oocyte <strong>(</strong></font><a
href="http://nmhm.washingtondc.museum/collections/hdac/stage1.pdf"><span
style="color: blue;"><font size="3"><strong>http://nmhm.washingtondc.museum/collections/hdac/stage1.pdf</strong></font></span></a><font
size="3"><strong>)</strong>. If the zygote is claimed instead, that
falsely justifies unethical research on the human embryo before the
formation of the zygote - when most unethical genetic engineering,
cloning, iPS research is performed. <o:p></o:p></font></font></span></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font size="3">(2)
The very same international experts' website has always documented that
normally a woman is pregnant when the new human being is formed at
first contact of the sperm with the oocyte inside the woman's fallopian
tube - absolutely not at implantation. It is only during artificial
assisted IVF/ART that a woman is pregnant at implantation. Dr. Condic's
false science would "justify" the use of abortifacients -- which even
the makers of Plan B admit on their website and in their medical
inserts that one mechanism of the pill is to prevent implantation of
the new already existing human being. This scientific error would also
justify embryo flushing, prenatal genetic diagnosis, and the use of the
early human embryo until the blastocyst stage in unethical research
such as human cloning and other unethical genetic engineering, etc. <o:p></o:p></font></font></span></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font size="3">(3)
Not all human beings begin with "conception" (sexual reproduction);
even one of every two natural monozygotic twins naturally occurring
within a woman's body are asexually reproduced, as are IVF/ART twins,
clones, etc. Dr. Condic's false science leaves out all asexually
reproduced human beings - who can then be exploited and killed. <o:p></o:p></font></font></span></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font size="3">(4)
Dr. Condic seems oblivious to the concept that the right to life is
fundamentally a natural right conferred by God and by virtue of the
embryo's own inherent humanity, rather than by political "consensus" or
"logic". <o:p></o:p></font></font></span></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font size="3">(5)
Dr. Condic also seems unaware that the question of when a human BEING
begins to exist is a strictly scientific question, but that the
question of when a human PERSON begins to exist is a philosophical or
theological question. One can't empirically document "personhood", but
only reason to it - IF the accurate human embryology is used as the
starting point. <o:p></o:p></font></font></span></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font size="3">(6)
Dr. Condic seems to co-opt the current "personhood" language by
identifying the zygote rather than the embryo formed at first contact
of sperm and oocyte as "when human life begins". Personhood initiatives
beware. <o:p></o:p></font></font></span></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><br>
<font size="3">Dr. Dianne N. Irving, M.A., Ph.D. <br>
Former career appointed biologist/biochemist NCI/NIH, and <br>
Professor of the history of philosophy, and of medical ethics <o:p></o:p></font></font></span></p>
<div style="margin: 24pt 0in;" class="MsoNormal"><span style=""
lang="EN"><font id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial"
size="2"><font size="3">
<hr align="left" size="2" width="100%"></font></font></span><a
href="http://www.ncregister.com/site/article/19659"><span
style="color: blue;"><font size="3">http://www.ncregister.com/site/article/19659</font></span></a>
<br>
NCRegister.com December 20, 2009-January 2, 2010 Issue <br>
</div>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font size="3">Posted
12/14/09 at 1:04 PM <o:p></o:p></font></font></span></p>
<span style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;"
lang="EN">
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><br>
<font size="3">By Sue Ellin Browder </font></font></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font size="3"><o:p></o:p></font></font></p>
</span><font id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"> </font>
<p style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;" class="MsoNormal"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><b><span
style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif'; color: rgb(153, 0, 51); font-size: 18pt;"
lang="EN">When Human Life Begins <o:p></o:p></span></b></font></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"></span><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"> </font></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font size="3">Many
politicians and lawyers nowadays say the answer to this question
remains shrouded in "mystery." As pro-abortion Speaker of the House
Nancy Pelosi, a Catholic, told NBC News' Tom Brokaw last year, "I don't
think anybody can tell you when ... human life begins." Vice President
Joe Biden, another pro-abortion Catholic, told Brokaw he personally
believes life begins at conception simply as a "matter of faith." <o:p></o:p></font></font></span></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font size="3">But
cutting-edge biology can answer this question objectively, accurately
and definitively. In her paper "When Does Human Life Begin? A
Scientific Perspective," Maureen Condic, a senior fellow at The
Westchester Institute for Ethics & the Human Person, spells out the
simple scientific facts. It's available at WestchesterInstitute.net. <o:p></o:p></font></font></span></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font size="3">In
a conversation with the Register's Sue Ellin Browder, Condic, who is
also associate professor of neurobiology and anatomy at the University
of Utah School of Medicine, explained how these facts can help all
people of good will deepen our nation's dialogue about the beginnings
of life. </font></font></span></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font size="3"><o:p></o:p></font></font></span><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"> </font></p>
<p style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;" class="MsoNormal"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><b><span
style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif'; color: rgb(153, 0, 51); font-size: 16pt;"
lang="EN">You said the first step to understanding when a human person
begins is to understand how a whole living being (an organism) differs
from a clump of cells. <o:p></o:p></span></b></font></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"></span><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"> </font></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font size="3">Yes.
Living beings exist, and we all recognize them - dogs, cats,
mosquitoes, oak trees, people. As living beings, we're all integrated,
functioning wholes. We have parts that all work together in order to do
the job of life. Sometimes diseases, injuries or defects - birth
defects, for example - can compromise the functioning of the whole
being. But even if a little baby is born without arms, a very
unfortunate birth defect, we all recognize it's still a baby. </font></font></span></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font size="3"><o:p></o:p></font></font></span><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"> </font></p>
<p style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;" class="MsoNormal"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><b><span
style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif'; color: rgb(153, 0, 51); font-size: 16pt;"
lang="EN">So a living being differs from a clump of cells in that the
organism has interacting parts working together as a coordinated whole?
<o:p></o:p></span></b></font></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"></span><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"> </font></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font size="3">Yes.
Although collections of human cells are alive, they fail to work
together in an interdependent, coordinated way to "carry on the
activities of life." </font></font></span></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font size="3"><o:p></o:p></font></font></span><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"> </font></p>
<p style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;" class="MsoNormal"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><b><span
style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif'; color: rgb(153, 0, 51); font-size: 16pt;"
lang="EN">So when do you first see an embryo behaving in this way - as
a whole being with integrated parts all working together in a
coordinated way? <o:p></o:p></span></b></font></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"></span><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"> </font></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font size="3">The
scientific evidence on this is very clear. You see this kind of
holistic functioning <b style="">from the moment when a new cell,
distinct from the sperm and the egg, comes into existence</b>. </font></font></span></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font size="3"><o:p></o:p></font></font></span><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"> </font></p>
<p style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;" class="MsoNormal"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><b><span
style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif'; color: rgb(153, 0, 51); font-size: 16pt;"
lang="EN">How quickly does this fusion between sperm and egg take
place? <o:p></o:p></span></b></font></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"></span><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"> </font></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font size="3">It's
a very rapid event. In less than a second, an entirely new human cell
comes into existence. <b style="">This new human cell (known as a
zygote)</b> has a unique molecular composition that's distinct from
either the sperm or the egg. And its behavior also differs radically
from that of either sperm or egg. </font></font></span></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font size="3"><o:p></o:p></font></font></span><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"> </font></p>
<p style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;" class="MsoNormal"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><b><span
style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif'; color: rgb(153, 0, 51); font-size: 16pt;"
lang="EN">In what way? <o:p></o:p></span></b></font></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"></span><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"> </font></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font size="3">Well,
for example, the <b style="">zygote's</b> first act is to change its
composition <b style="">so no other sperm can bind to its surface</b>.
This happens within the first 30 minutes following sperm-egg fusion. </font></font></span></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font size="3"><o:p></o:p></font></font></span><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"> </font></p>
<p style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;" class="MsoNormal"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><b><span
style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif'; color: rgb(153, 0, 51); font-size: 16pt;"
lang="EN">So you're saying this little single cell biologically acts
as a coordinated whole "in its own interest," so to speak? <o:p></o:p></span></b></font></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"></span><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"> </font></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font size="3">I
would say that even at the one-cell stage, the zygote is directing its
own development. About five or six days later, at about the time of
implantation, the embryo produces a hormone that can be detected in the
mother's blood or urine to tell her she's pregnant. </font></font></span></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font size="3"><o:p></o:p></font></font></span><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"> </font></p>
<p style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;" class="MsoNormal"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><b><span
style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif'; color: rgb(153, 0, 51); font-size: 16pt;"
lang="EN">This human zygote seems to be very busy. Why do so many
people believe a human person's life begins at a later stage? <o:p></o:p></span></b></font></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"></span><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"> </font></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font size="3">Many
people think that because the embryo isn't fully formed, it's not a new
individual. A colleague recently told me that the embryo is merely "a
unique human cell in the process of becoming a new human, but not there
yet." <o:p></o:p></font></font></span></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font size="3">This
way of thinking is compelling because it's similar to our thinking
about the much more familiar process of manufacturing. <b style="">A
car isn't a car until it rolls off the assembly line. Until then, it's
just a bunch of parts in the process of becoming a car</b>. </font></font></span></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font size="3"><o:p></o:p></font></font></span><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"> </font></p>
<p style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;" class="MsoNormal"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><b><span
style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif'; color: rgb(153, 0, 51); font-size: 16pt;"
lang="EN">But you said a profound difference exists between
manufacturing a car and embryonic development. And what is that? <o:p></o:p></span></b></font></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"></span><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"> </font></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font size="3">The
difference is who (or what) is doing the "producing." The embryo is not
being passively built by some external "builder" controlling the
assembly process. Rather, the embryo is manufacturing itself. <o:p></o:p></font></font></span></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font size="3">There
is actually no endpoint to the "building" of a self-organizing human
being. It's an ongoing process that continues from sperm-egg fusion -
the <b style="">"moment of conception"</b> - through birth, maturation
and aging and ends only in death. <o:p></o:p></font></font></span></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font size="3">If
<b style="">a person begins at fusion (fertilization)</b>, what does
this say about "emergency contraception" pills like Plan B? The
manufacturer says Plan B doesn't kill a person because it doesn't
disrupt an implanted pregnancy. <o:p></o:p></font></font></span></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font size="3">Well,
<b style="">I think the jury is still out on whether Plan B kills an
implanted embryo</b>. But my concern is that once an embryo has been
conceived, even preventing implantation is killing it. </font></font></span></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font size="3"><o:p></o:p></font></font></span><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"> </font></p>
<p style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;" class="MsoNormal"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><b><span
style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif'; color: rgb(153, 0, 51); font-size: 16pt;"
lang="EN">The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists
actually redefined "pregnancy" in 1965 as beginning not at
fertilization but at implantation. Some say it was done to get around
the fact an intrauterine device could cause abortions. What do you
think of that? <o:p></o:p></span></b></font></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"></span><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"> </font></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font size="3">I
think it was done for political reasons. But, that said, <b style="">I
think defining "pregnancy" as implantation makes perfect sense both
medically and biologically</b>. </font></font></span></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font size="3"><o:p></o:p></font></font></span><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"> </font></p>
<p style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;" class="MsoNormal"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><b><span
style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif'; color: rgb(153, 0, 51); font-size: 16pt;"
lang="EN">Interesting. Why? <o:p></o:p></span></b></font></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"></span><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"> </font></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font size="3">Because
"pregnancy" is the state of the woman, and <b style="">a woman does
not become pregnant until she's gestating an embryo or fetus. That
requires implantation</b>. <o:p></o:p></font></font></span></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font size="3">But
that's irrelevant to the life of the individual conceived at
fertilization. I actually think a fairly strong legal argument can be
made that taking a lethal action against a human being prior to
implantation steps outside the whole Roe v. Wade jurisprudence
entirely. </font></font></span></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font size="3"><o:p></o:p></font></font></span><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"> </font></p>
<p style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;" class="MsoNormal"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><b><span
style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif'; color: rgb(153, 0, 51); font-size: 16pt;"
lang="EN">In what way? <o:p></o:p></span></b></font></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"></span><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"> </font></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font size="3">The
whole basis of the "right" to an abortion is that a woman has a right
to control her own body. <o:p></o:p></font></font></span></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font size="3">Ah.
But prior to implantation, the self-organizing human embryo isn't
attached to her body. Right. It's not involving your body if you're
taking lethal action toward an embryo prior to implantation. </font></font></span></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font size="3"><o:p></o:p></font></font></span><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"> </font></p>
<p style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;" class="MsoNormal"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><b><span
style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif'; color: rgb(153, 0, 51); font-size: 16pt;"
lang="EN">In Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court declined to decide when a
human person begins. Could these new biological facts challenge Roe v.
Wade at its very foundation? <o:p></o:p></span></b></font></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"></span><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"> </font></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font size="3">Let's
put it this way: We need to define what we're actually taking lethal
action against because the biology is unequivocal. You can't argue with
the biology. Anybody who tries will be blown out of the water. There's
no argument about the fact that embryos are human beings from a
scientifically well-defined <b style="">"moment of conception."</b>
That's what they are. </font></font></span></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font size="3"><o:p></o:p></font></font></span><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"> </font></p>
<p style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;" class="MsoNormal"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><b><span
style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif'; color: rgb(153, 0, 51); font-size: 16pt;"
lang="EN">This brings up a frequently asked question that goes beyond
when life begins. And that is: When does the right to life begin? <o:p></o:p></span></b></font></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"></span><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"> </font></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font size="3">I
think ultimately this is the real debate. Let's stop arguing about when
life begins. We know when life begins. There's no question about it.
Beyond that, you're then left with the question "When do we assign
rights to this individual?" <o:p></o:p></font></font></span></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font size="3">Let's
talk about what we really are arguing about: When do rights begin? When
do we confer rights upon embryos? We know they are clearly human beings
- a living member of the human species - from the one-cell stage
forward. When do we actually value these persons sufficiently to allow
them the right to continued existence? <o:p></o:p></font></font></span></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font size="3">You
said that when we assign rights to an individual person is ostensibly
an arguable point. I think ultimately the implications of the argument
become terrifying pretty quickly. But, still, you can make the argument
that we as a society give and take away rights all the time. You know,
children don't drive cars, vote or drink alcohol. And aged people who
run their cars up onto bus stops and kill people have their right to
drive taken away. So based on their biological state - their physical
or mental competence, their age, their maturity - we confer or revoke
rights on people all the time. <o:p></o:p></font></font></span></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font size="3">So
how do we decide when to confer rights on a person in the embryonic
stage of development? There are a number of ways to do it. The first is
that we assign rights intrinsically to you as a person simply because
you're a member of the human species. That's the historical way rights
have been assigned in this country and throughout the world. "All men
are created equal." All members of the human race have certain rights
that accrue to them inherently, among which are the right to "life,
liberty and the pursuit of happiness." That's in the Declaration of
Independence. </font></font></span></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font size="3"><o:p></o:p></font></font></span><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"> </font></p>
<p style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;" class="MsoNormal"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><b><span
style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif'; color: rgb(153, 0, 51); font-size: 16pt;"
lang="EN">But many people, even Catholic politicians, rebel against
this way of conferring rights on embryonic persons. Why? <o:p></o:p></span></b></font></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"></span><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"> </font></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font size="3">I
think the problem is the emotional response. People can follow the
argument up through the point of "Okay, so an embryo is a human
organism, and it starts at fertilization." But then they look at this
clump of cells. They look at their spouse, child or grandmother. And
they protest, "How can you possibly say these two things are of equal
moral worth? How can you equate this little ball of cells with my child
who's dying of cancer or my grandmother who has Parkinson's?"
Obviously, your emotions and your intuitions just go into a stage of
revolt. They say, "It's not possible. These two things are too
different in magnitude: One is foreign and small and it doesn't even
look like a person; it doesn't do anything. And the other one is this
individual I love and whose health I care about." <o:p></o:p></font></font></span></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font size="3">So
I think that's what drives the rejection of rights adhering in a person
simply because of what they are - a member of the human species. People
reject it, and they cast about for other ways to assign rights. </font></font></span></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font size="3"><o:p></o:p></font></font></span><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"> </font></p>
<p style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;" class="MsoNormal"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><b><span
style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif'; color: rgb(153, 0, 51); font-size: 16pt;"
lang="EN">What other ways are there? <o:p></o:p></span></b></font></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"></span><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"> </font></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font size="3">One
argument is that rights gradually accrue as a function of some aspect
of biological maturity. For example, when my lungs are mature to the
point that I can have viability if I'm born, then I have the right to
life. </font></font></span></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font size="3"><o:p></o:p></font></font></span><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"> </font></p>
<p style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;" class="MsoNormal"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><b><span
style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif'; color: rgb(153, 0, 51); font-size: 16pt;"
lang="EN">But you said most people reject viability as a meaningful
argument. Why? <o:p></o:p></span></b></font></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"></span><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"> </font></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font size="3">Because
viability says nothing about whether or not the developing fetus we're
talking about is actually a person. It only says something about the
state of our technology. Why should a fetus in rural Nebraska without
access to sophisticated neonatal intensive care be a nonperson at 30
weeks because we just don't have the equipment to keep it alive, but a
fetus at Beth Israel Hospital in Boston be a person at 20 weeks? It
seems absurd to make personhood contingent on the availability of
technology. </font></font></span></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font size="3"><o:p></o:p></font></font></span><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"> </font></p>
<p style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;" class="MsoNormal"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><b><span
style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif'; color: rgb(153, 0, 51); font-size: 16pt;"
lang="EN">What about assigning rights according to brain maturity -
consciousness or, perhaps, the capacity for reason or self-awareness? <o:p></o:p></span></b></font></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"></span><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"> </font></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font size="3">I
can understand why people focus on consciousness, because our ability
to understand ourselves is the basis for all our most meaningful
experiences. Our memories, feelings, emotions and thoughts all involve
the ability to reflect on yourself and to be aware of who you are as a
thinker, an actor, a person who chooses. It's the intimacy of this
conscious experience, I think, that drives people to believe this is
somehow critical to being a human being. And yet when we try to assign
rights in this way, we run immediately into problems. Given the very,
very slow course of brain development - which is my field - the brain
isn't fully "mature" until you're in your 20s. The question "When do
you have a brain?" depends on how you define "brain." The strict
neurobiologist would say, well, at age 25. That's a mature brain. And
from then on out, it's a declining brain. You have a very brief window
of time where your brain gets to maturity - and then it starts falling
apart. Sad but true. Since the "mature brain" exists only for some
brief moment of time, after which it starts decay, how can we use this
as the criterion on which we're to assign the right to life? </font></font></span></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font size="3"><o:p></o:p></font></font></span><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"> </font></p>
<p style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;" class="MsoNormal"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><b><span
style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif'; color: rgb(153, 0, 51); font-size: 16pt;"
lang="EN">What about consciousness as a criterion for assigning
rights? <o:p></o:p></span></b></font></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"></span><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"> </font></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font size="3">If
we use consciousness as a basis, what about retarded individuals who
never achieve a fully mature level of consciousness? Are we going to
assign rights proportionate to intelligence - with smart people having
greater liberty and more rights than less intelligent people? <o:p></o:p></font></font></span></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font size="3">Everybody
rejects this immediately: "Oh, that's absurd! Of course we don't do
that!" But then, where's the bar? Where are we going to set the
consciousness bar so it's low enough to exclude embryos but high enough
to include severely retarded people? And if we set the bar below a
typically human level of consciousness, then we run into problems
coming up from the bottom. Why are not chimpanzees then human persons?
And why are not dogs human persons? Plenty of animals have a level of
brain function comparable to that of a newborn. </font></font></span></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font size="3"><o:p></o:p></font></font></span><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"> </font></p>
<p style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;" class="MsoNormal"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><b><span
style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif'; color: rgb(153, 0, 51); font-size: 16pt;"
lang="EN">Then you said there's the social-consensus way of assigning
rights. What's that about? <o:p></o:p></span></b></font></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"></span><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"> </font></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font size="3">People
will say, "Well, okay, personhood doesn't have to be linked to biology.
It's just a social consensus. When people feel 'comfortable' calling
something a person, then it is. We're just going to get everybody
together in a big group hug and decide 'where we feel comfortable'
conferring rights upon a baby." <o:p></o:p></font></font></span></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font size="3">The
problem with this, of course, is that once you've embarked down this
road - that we've all just "agreed" that a fetus has a right to live at
a certain point in time because "we feel good about this" - you
eventually undermine the concept of rights completely. </font></font></span></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font size="3"><o:p></o:p></font></font></span><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"> </font></p>
<p style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;" class="MsoNormal"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><b><span
style="font-family: 'Georgia','serif'; color: rgb(153, 0, 51); font-size: 16pt;"
lang="EN">In what way? <o:p></o:p></span></b></font></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"></span><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"> </font></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font size="3">Once
rights become a matter of social consensus, on what basis could you
possibly object to Nazi Germany? There was a social consensus there:
The majority of voters elected Hitler and supported his policies. They
all got together, and coming out of their little huddle, agreed that
Jews didn't have any rights. <o:p></o:p></font></font></span></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font size="3">To
people who take this social-consensus view of rights, it seems
"reasonable" and "intuitive." It feels like it should make sense. And
yet as soon as you start pushing it intellectually in any way
whatsoever, it really means there are no rights at all. If there's only
consensus, there's no conceivable basis for objecting to denying rights
to anyone. <o:p></o:p></font></font></span></p>
<p style="margin: 2.4pt 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0.2in;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black;" lang="EN"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font size="3">So
we're left to come up with another view - or to accept the
uncomfortable truth that rights adhere in a person simply because
they're a human being. And if that's the case - if rights accrue to a
person independent of their size, state of maturity, functional
abilities, consciousness or any other feature - the conclusion is
inescapable: We have to confer rights on embryos from the one-cell
stage onward. <o:p></o:p></font></font></span></p>
<div style="margin: 24pt 0in;" class="MsoNormal"><span style=""
lang="EN"><font id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial"
size="2"><font size="3">
<hr align="left" size="2" width="100%"></font></font></span></div>
<p style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;" class="MsoNormal"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><i><span
style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; color: rgb(0, 0, 153);"
lang="EN"><font size="3">Sue Ellin Browder writes from Ukiah,
California. <o:p></o:p></font></span></i></font></p>
<p style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;" class="MsoNormal"><o:p><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><font
face="Times New Roman" size="3"> <br>
</font></font></o:p></p>
<p style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;" class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; color: black; font-size: 10pt;"><font
id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2">FAIR USE
NOTICE: This may contain copyrighted (C ) material the use of which<br>
has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such<br>
material is made available for educational purposes, to advance<br>
understanding of human rights, democracy, scientific, moral, ethical,
and<br>
social justice issues, etc. It is believed that this constitutes a 'fair<br>
use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Title 17 U.S.C.<br>
section 107 of the US Copyright Law. This material is distributed
without<br>
profit. Emphases added.</font></span></p>
</div>
<div><font id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"> </font></div>
<div><font id="role_document" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"> </font></div>
</div>
<hr size="2" width="100%"><font face="Calisto MT">PFLI
PharmAid Center<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:pfli@pfli.org">pfli@pfli.org</a><br>
PO Box 1281<br>
Powell, OH 43065-1281 USA</font><font face="Calisto MT"><br>
800-227-8359</font><font face="Calisto MT"><br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="http://www.pfli.org">www.pfli.org</a>
</font><br>
<p><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="%3Cform%20action=%22https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr%22%20method=%22post%22%3E,%3Cinput%20type=%22hidden%22%20name=%22cmd%22%20value=%22_s-xclick%22%3E,%3Cinput%20type=%22image%22%20src=%22https://www.paypal.com/en_US/i/btn/x-click-butcc-donate.gif%22%20border=%220%22%20name=%22submit%22%20alt=%22Make%20payments%20with%20PayPal%20-%20it%27s%20fast,%20free%20and%20secure%21%22%3E,%3Cinput%20type=%22hidden%22%20name=%22encrypted%22%20value=%22-----BEGIN%20PKCS7-----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
%0A%0A%0A%0A%0A7yAaPdNuhkxhP7at8q3uBYpPEsrPDNFUT6LF5ifULBN1NQe0HVyskYDtW0+TpTfBoDtHNzPOPdP31JXxAhNanUcUHrTeJ2wqvWRkjHAPKAm8N54pgMLxmXAmH7ZAbvBgBmL+5RAwTiopzewoIIDhzCCA4MwggLsoAMCAQICAQAwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQAwgY4xCzAJBgNVBAYTAlVTMQswCQYDVQQIEwJDQTEWMBQGA1UEBxMNTW91bnRhaW4gVmlldzEUMBIGA1UEChMLUGF5UGFsIEluYy4xEzARBgNVBAsUCmxpdmVfY2VydHMxETAPBgNVBAMUCGxpdmVfYXBpMRwwGgYJKoZIhvcNAQkBFg1yZUBwYXlwYWwuY29tMB4XDTA0MDIxMzEwMTMxNVoXDTM1MDIxMzEwMTMxNVowgY4xCzAJBgNVBAYTAlVTMQswCQYDVQQIEwJDQTEWMBQGA1UEBxMNTW91bnRhaW4gVmlldzEUMBIGA1UEChMLUGF5UGFsIEluYy4xEzARBgNVBAsUCmxpdmVfY2VydHMxETAPBgNVBAMUCGxpdmVfYXBpMRwwGgYJKoZIhvcNAQkBFg1yZUBwYXlwYWwuY29tMIGfMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBAQUAA4GNADCBiQKBgQDBR07d/ETMS1ycjtkpkvjXZe9k+6CieLuLsPumsJ7QC1odNz3sJiCbs2wC0nLE0uLGaEtXynIgRqIddYCHx88pb5HTXv4SZeuv0Rqq4+axW9PLAAATU8w04qqjaSXgbGLP3NmohqM6bV9kZZwZLR/klDaQGo1u9uDb9lr4Yn+rBQIDAQABo4HuMIHrMB0GA1UdDgQWBBSWn3y7xm8XvVk/UtcKG+wQ1mSUazCBuwYDVR0jBIGzMIGwgBSWn3y7xm8XvVk/UtcKG+wQ1mSUa6GBlKSBkTCBjjELMAkGA1UEBhMCVVMxCzAJBgNVBAgT
AkN%0ABMR%0AYwF%0AAYD%0AVQQ%0AHEw1Nb3VudGFpbiBWaWV3MRQwEgYDVQQKEwtQYXlQYWwgSW5jLjETMBEGA1UECxQKbGl2ZV9jZXJ0czERMA8GA1UEAxQIbGl2ZV9hcGkxHDAaBgkqhkiG9w0BCQEWDXJlQHBheXBhbC5jb22CAQAwDAYDVR0TBAUwAwEB/zANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQUFAAOBgQCBXzpWmoBa5e9fo6ujionW1hUhPkOBakTr3YCDjbYfvJEiv/2P+IobhOGJr85+XHhN0v4gUkEDI8r2/rNk1m0GA8HKddvTjyGw/XqXa+LSTlDYkqI8OwR8GEYj4efEtcRpRYBxV8KxAW93YDWzFGvruKnnLbDAF6VR5w/cCMn5hzGCAZowggGWAgEBMIGUMIGOMQswCQYDVQQGEwJVUzELMAkGA1UECBMCQ0ExFjAUBgNVBAcTDU1vdW50YWluIFZpZXcxFDASBgNVBAoTC1BheVBhbCBJbmMuMRMwEQYDVQQLFApsaXZlX2NlcnRzMREwDwYDVQQDFAhsaXZlX2FwaTEcMBoGCSqGSIb3DQEJARYNcmVAcGF5cGFsLmNvbQIBADAJBgUrDgMCGgUAoF0wGAYJKoZIhvcNAQkDMQsGCSqGSIb3DQEHATAcBgkqhkiG9w0BCQUxDxcNMDUxMDE1MTMwMDQ0WjAjBgkqhkiG9w0BCQQxFgQUffWEvKx+dRuoUbj/1JzdUsifmMMwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEBBQAEgYAu8n3eM94Q9Ta1JzS3FJsXA/k61ZE+06w6C1NlDAIZsTljtdyhpTFe8GQ0OcwijWE96gE/HZtj8GzytiBX0qpRrGSNbiVBLzva6+9N3LdKjHIzCBh5YxCOMAlXDRyxjsX0SfhRHDYOw+sy9ZlRveGv+UjsUyft1dU3ywKy+Sk+KQ==-----END%20PKCS7-----,%22%3E,%3C/form%3E"><
br>
<img alt="" src="cid:part4.07080807.05070302@pfli.org" height="44"
width="73"></a><br>
</p>
<p><font color="#3333ff"><big><big><font face="Calisto MT"><small><small><font
color="#000000">PFLI supports
pharmacist rights of conscience NOT
to be forced to dispense or counsel for chemicals which violate their
sincerely held religious, moral or ethical beliefs. For more info see:<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://www.pfli.org/main.php?pfli=conscienceclausefaq">http://www.pfli.org/main.php?pfli=conscienceclausefaq</a></font></small></small></font></big></big></font></p>
<p><small>*** PFLI is the only pharmacy association which is
exclusively
pro-life.
<br>
It represents thousands of pharmacists and many lay supporters
<br>
in the USA, Canada and all around the globe. For membership info, key
<br>
PFLI texts, PFLI archives, late-breaking news, abridged newsletter
excerpts
<br>
or general information, visit the PFLI web site at <a
moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://www.pfli.org">http://www.pfli.org</a>.
<br>
Or e-mail us at <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:pfli@pfli.org">mailto:pfli@pfli.org</a>.
</small></p>
<p><small>*** We do NOT send out SPAM. To subscribe to PharmFacts
E-News, just send an e-mail
with the
word
<br>
"subscribe" in the subject area or better yet, just enroll right from
our main news page at<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://www.pfli.org">http://www.pfli.org</a>; to cease your
subscription [although
we can't
<br>
imagine anyone would!] self-manage your account at:
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://pfli.org/mailman/listinfo/pflienews_pfli.org">http://pfli.org/mailman/listinfo/pflienews_pfli.org</a><br>
</small></p>
<p><small>*** You may contact PFLI at any/all of the following:
Pharmacists
For
Life International,
<br>
PO Box 1281, Powell, OH 43065-1281 USA, 1-800-227-8359 [US &
Canada only],
<br>
+1-740-881-5520 [voice] or +1-740-206-1260 [fax]; e-mail us at
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:pfli@pfli.org">mailto:pfli@pfli.org</a>.
<br>
</small></p>
<p><small>*** You can order our publications as well as begin/renew
your
membership
or donate right on our
<br>
secure website at <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://www.pfli.org">http://www.pfli.org/shop</a>.
Click
on the "PFLI Store" link on the toolbar and
<br>
follow the prompts!
There you can also donate to PFLI as well as purchase a wide range of
publications. </small></p>
<font color="#3333ff"><b><big><big><font face="Calisto MT">
</font></big></big></b></font><br>
<br>
<div class="moz-signature">-- <br>
<img src="cid:part5.02060904.08020109@pfli.org" border="0"></div>
<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>