by Jill Stanek
That Sen. Jeff Schoenberg and Rep. Tom Cross changed the definition of "cloning" in their current embryonic stem cell research bills from previous versions should give honest liberal supporters pause for thought. Scientific definitions are not subjective. Is it possible we are right that they are engaging in deceptive word play to legalize taxpayer-funded human cloning without the public knowing?
New definition of cloning in HB318 and SB0004:
to transfer to a uterus or attempt to transfer to a uterus anything other than the product of fertilization of an egg of a human female by a sperm of a human male for the purpose of initiating a pregnancy that could result in the creation of a human fetus or the birth of a human being.
Old definition of cloning in the 94th GA's HB3815 and SB2100:
the asexual human reproduction by implanting or attempting to implant the product of nuclear transplanation into a woman's uterus to initiate a pregnancy or the replication of a human being through the production of a precise genetic copy of human DNA or any other molecule, cell, or tissue, in order to create a new human being.
Perhaps the words "nuclear transplantation" in the old bills made dots too connectable. For while stating they prohibit human cloning, Schoenberg and Cross's bills "permit[]... research involving... somatic cell nuclear transplantation...." which is human cloning. Try googling the term.
Schoenberg and Cross are trying to say the equivalent of this: "We forbid research on human beings. But we allow research on homo sapiens. For the purpose of this bill, homo sapiens are not humans if we want to experiment on them.
