Controversy about stem cell research continues
Published April 27, 2007
Furor over embryonic stem-cell research in Missouri continued Wednesday, once again reaching the national spotlight, as objections to an upcoming fundraiser performance by MU graduate Sheryl Crow for a Catholic charity have led to the resignation of a St. Louis archbishop from the hospital board.
A statement released by the Archdiocese of St. Louis stated Archbishop Raymond Burke was concerned about Crow's performance as part of the April 28 Bob Costas Benefit to raise funds for the SSM Cardinal Glennon Children's Medical Center. Burke was concerned about Crow's support of Amendment 2 to Missouri's constitution.
The release stated that allowing her to perform at the event would present the image that the Roman Catholic Church is not consistent in its anti-abortion beliefs.
"(Crow's) appearance at a fundraising event for Cardinal Glennon Children's Medical Center is an affront to the identity and mission of the medical center, dedicated as it is to the service of life and Christ's healing mission," Burke said in a news conference Wednesday.
Crow, who appeared in TV advertisements prior to Election Day 2006 endorsing Amendment 2, is still set to appear at the event. The amendment, in favor of embryonic stem-cell research and funding, was passed by 51.2 percent of Missouri voters in a referendum last November.
Burke's resignation is the latest in a series of episodes stemming from the controversial amendment that has affected not only the state's religious institutions but also its higher education system.
A measure that would have given MU $31 million to fund the Ellis Fischel Cancer Center from the sale of assets from the Missouri Higher Education Loan Authority, the state's student loan agency, was stripped from legislation passed in the Missouri Senate April 18.
Rep. Judy Baker, D-Columbia, said there is skittishness among Republicans in the General Assembly to fund any projects that could contribute to health care research.
"I would think they would follow the vote of the people that was established in November," Baker said.
Missouri Catholic Conference spokeswoman Kathleen Lavery said the funding could be used for unethical research.
"Regardless of stripping out potential funding of life sciences research, its still very probable as far as we're concerned," Lavery said.
Missouri Right to Life issued an alert April 12 stating that the MOHELA bill would fund facilities that seek to "kill embryonic humans to harvest their stem cells."
The groups also opposed the March 30 passage of a budget appropriation in the House of Representatives. If passed in the Senate, the appropriation would provide $13.4 million for a trust fund for life sciences research in the state.
Roger Mitchell, former dean of agriculture and chairman of the Life Sciences Research Board, said if the proposed appropriation for the fund were to pass in this legislative session, it would be the first year that the trust fund has received financial support.
Mitchell said if the trust were funded, the money would be spent in the area of bioenergy, plant science, animal health and nutrition.
Mitchell said though a method to oversee the legal use of trust-fund moneys by its beneficiaries has yet to be determined, one would be formed upon passage of the trust fund.
"A method would be put into place that makes sure they use the money as we expected them to," Mitchell said.
Michael Roberts, animal science professor at MU, said though passage of the trust fund would provide life-science research with vital funds, he would like to see it passed with more funding.
"It would really contribute to raising the standard of research," Roberts said.
Roberts said restrictions on life-science research in Missouri makes the state look silly and could put its life-science industry at a disadvantage compared with other states.
"Missouri, in order to attract the industry, needs to appear as if it's doing cutting edge research," Roberts said.