Old, but accurate??

The Mormon Stem-Cell Choir
By Drew Clark
Posted Friday, Aug. 3, 2001, at 3:00 AM ET
Two weeks ago, Senate supporters of human embryonic stem-cell research
summoned four of their colleagues to testify at a hearing. Of the four
senators selected, one was an opponent of ESCR; another was the sponsor of a
compromise bill. The other two, lavishly praised for their advocacy of ESCR,
were Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, and Sen. Gordon Smith, R-Ore. Why Hatch and
Smith? The obvious reason is that they, unlike the colleagues who praised
them, are pro-life on abortion, thereby lending an air of consensus to ESCR.
But beneath that answer lies another. Both men were introduced as graduates
of Brigham Young University. They're Mormons.
While pundits chatter on about the role of Catholic leaders in the stem-cell
debate, the influence of Mormons-members of the Church of Jesus Christ of
Latter-day Saints-goes almost unnoticed. Hatch and Smith have become the
leaders of a movement within the Republican Party to urge President Bush to
fund embryonic stem-cell research. All five Mormon senators-the others are
Sens. Robert Bennett, R-Utah; Mike Crapo, R-Idaho; and Harry Reid,
D-Nev.-have come out for such funding They have helped move the debate away
from right-to-life absolutism without sacrificing pro-life theology. The LDS
Church, not the Vatican, is playing the pivotal role in the struggle over
stem cells.
Mormons have long been part of the conservative coalition on moral issues.
They resisted the Equal Rights Amendment in the 1970s and early 1980s. They
have staunchly opposed pornography and abortion on demand. But stem-cell
research has splintered that coalition, separating Mormons from conservative
Catholics. In an audience last week with Bush, Pope John Paul II restated
the Catholic Church's opposition to abortion and "related evils" such as
euthanasia, infanticide, and the destruction of human embryos through
stem-cell research. That statement drew upon the pope's 1995 encyclical,
Evangelium Vitae: On the Value and Inviolability of Human Life, and his 1987
encyclical, Donum Vitae (Gift of Life): Instruction on Respect for Human
Life in Its Origin and the Dignity of Procreation. Both documents elaborate
on the Catholic position that life begins at conception, equating abortion
and stem-cell research with murder.
Leaders of the LDS Church have been far more circumspect about both
subjects. The church released a statement of neutrality on stem-cell
research in July, but it went on to say that the practice "merits cautious
scrutiny. The proclaimed potential to provide cures or treatments for many
serious diseases needs careful and continuing study by conscientious,
qualified investigators. As with any emerging new technology, there are
concerns that must be addressed. Scientific and religious viewpoints both
demand that strict moral and ethical guidelines be followed."
What the LDS Church didn't issue-and what its statements on abortion
similarly avoid-is any statement about when life begins, and hence whether
embryos constitute human life. Rather than referring to the Biblical
commandment "Thou shalt not kill," the church's 1991 statement on abortion
cited a scripture from The Doctrine and Covenants, a collection of
revelations received by Joseph Smith, whom the church regards as its first
prophet. The scripture reads, "Thou shalt not steal; neither commit
adultery, nor kill, nor do anything like unto it." The phrase "like unto it"
suggests that while most abortions are sinful, they are not quite the same
as murder.
Why is the Mormon stance more flexible than the Catholic stance? For
Catholics, life begins at conception. To illustrate this point, Evangelium
Vitae refers to Mary carrying Jesus in her womb. But Mormon doctrine holds
that each person lived as a spirit child of God prior to being born and
receiving a physical body on Earth. From this point of view, it makes no
sense to say that life begins at conception. Instead, Mormons would say that
life on earth begins when the spirit and body are united.
In his testimony, Sen. Smith made this very point. Without calling attention
to his Mormon beliefs, he cited Genesis 2:7, "And the Lord God formed man of
the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life;
and man became a living soul." Smith went on to explain, "This allegory of
creation describes a two-step process to life, one of the flesh, the other
of the spirit." He compared stem cells to "the dust of the earth -they are
essential to life, but standing alone, will never constitute life." As Smith
portrayed it, the onset of life-the union of spirit and body-takes place
when the embryo is implanted in a womb.
Richard Doerflinger, the associate director of pro-life activities for the
U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, later described Smith's theory as
"amateur theology." But if Doerflinger didn't know that he was implicitly
dismissing the theology of the nation's fifth-largest denomination, the
amateurism was his own. Many Mormons would buttress Smith's reading of
Genesis by pointing to two other written accounts of the creation-both in
the Pearl of Great Price, another collection of scriptures brought forth by
Joseph Smith-which emphasize the same two-step process of spiritual and
physical creation.
You don't have to believe in this scripture or theology to appreciate the
Mormon view of stem cells and the crucial role it plays in the current
debate. Most supporters of ESCR in the Senate are pro-choice Democrats.
Their stance on ESCR carries no great weight with, and offers no defensible
rationale to, Bush or pro-life Republicans in Congress. The stem-cell
movement needs spokesmen who are morally conservative, pro-life on abortion,
and pro-ESCR based on a coherent philosophy that wasn't invented for the
occasion. The Mormon philosophy, which holds that fetal abortion is too much
like killing but that unimplanted blastocysts haven't yet been animated by
the human spirit, fits the bill. That's why Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., a
Jewish, pro-choice ESCR advocate, goes around quoting Smith on stem cells.
It's also why Hatch has taken the lead in lobbying Bush.
Can Mormons play a similar role on other issues? Not necessarily. Sometimes
Mormon doctrine is more rigid than Catholic doctrine. Both churches, for
example, condemn homosexual acts while urging compassion toward individuals
who engage in them. But the churches differ in their willingness to
acknowledge homosexuality as a permanent condition. "The number of men and
women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible,"
declares the Catholic catechism. Statements by LDS Church President Gordon
B. Hinckley speak more skeptically of those "who profess homosexual
tendencies" or "who consider themselves so-called gays and lesbians."
Again, theology explains the difference in emphasis and the importance that
Mormons, as opposed to Catholics, have attached to opposing same-gender
marriages in California and elsewhere. Where Catholics see the priestly life
of celibacy as valid and holy, Mormons view marriage between a man and woman
as necessary to progress in the eternal world after death-and part of a
God-given commandment to multiply and replenish the earth.
Mormons and Catholics also differ on Bush's plan to fund faith-based social
service organizations. The Conference of Catholic Bishops is pushing the
Bush plan, whereas Hinckley voiced skepticism that federal money would come
without strings attached and declared that the LDS Church would not seek to
participate. The string problem surfaced recently when the Salvation Army,
hoping to get some of the money, nevertheless sought an exemption from state
laws that prohibit discrimination against gays. The Mormons' aversion to
such church-state entanglements doesn't stem from their views about
sexuality. It stems from their persecution in the 19th century, their escape
to the West, and their success at running their own welfare program modeled
on LDS teachings.
As they prepare for the spotlight of the 2002 Winter Olympics in Salt Lake
City, Hinckley and other LDS leaders have been emphasizing what they have in
common with the rest of the Christian world. The outreach isn't always
reciprocated. In July, the Vatican declared that Mormons, unlike
Protestants, must be rebaptized when they convert to Catholicism. A
spokesman for the LDS Church, which requires rebaptism of all converts, said
that the Mormons took no offense. As the stem-cell debate illustrates, the
two churches won't always see eye to eye. And the Mormons won't always be
the losers.
Drew Clark is a senior writer at National Journal's Technology Daily.
Join the Fray: our reader discussion forum
What did you think of this article?
POST A MESSAGE | READ MESSAGES
Reader Comments From The Fray:
Drew Clark's point is well taken, but I doubt Mormon thought looms as large
in Bush Administration thinking on the stem cell research controversy as it
does in the mass media.
The Bush Administration, not for the first or last time, is tip-toeing
through this issue as if it were a minefield. It wants to accommodate the
many people who favor stem cell research, but fears alienating Catholics.
Karl Rove knows that Mormons, most of them politically conservative
Westerners, will continue to support Bush no matter what he does about
encouraging ESCR. He fears some of the much more numerous Catholics on one
side and ESCR proponents of various faiths on the other may not.
--Joseph Britt
Have any of you ever had to make a 2 year old child bleed 10 to 20 times a
day [on purpose]? Have any of you [within the Vatican] had to give a 2 year
old child 3 insulin injections a day? Have any of you had to hold a crying
child in the hospital who has gone through the trauma of insulin shock? If
you were told that a cure for juvenile diabetes was a very real
possibility..would you not ask yourself if God isn't telling us to try? Stem
cell research is real hope for the cure of this disease.
--Dee
Look who is talking about "souls" and look who's talking about biological
facts: the proponents of embryonic stem cell research, and the proponents of
cloning, are the ones who can't seem to stop talking about "souls" and
concepts like "personhood." The other side, the proponents of the right to
life, don't talk about those things, they just point out that we're talking
about destroying--biologically speaking--human beings.
--Thomas
We are a very odd society where our most powerful officials in this most
secular and technologically advanced nation make decisions informed by
religions that preach Virgin birth, angels and missing tribes of Israel.
--Cato the Censor

----------------------------------------------------------------------
To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: mailto:[log in to unmask]
In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn