Pro-Abort, CFR-Members, Republican Senators John Mccain and Bill Frist

Pro-abort, CFR-members, Republican Senators John McCain and Bill Frist

vote to federally fund embryo destruction and experimentation

McCain and Frist, possible Republican candidates for U.S. President in 2008,

already support "exceptions" to a ban on surgical abortion, and have now, on July 18,

also voted to use federal funds (our taxpayer money) to pay for the destruction and experimentation on human embryos (H.R. 810, already passed by Republican-majority

US House on May 24, 2005). See H.R. 810 at for the roll call votes

in both the Republican-majority US House, and the Republican-majority US Senate,

both of which have now passed H.R. 810). Congressional profile, House and Senate:

On “Meet the Press,” McCain said he had “come to the conclusion that the exceptions for rape,

incest, and the life of the mother are legitimate exceptions” to an outright ban on abortions.

"Bill Frist is not pro-life," said Judie Brown, president and co-founder of American Life League (ALL). "He's made all

kinds of strange statements, and is a shareholder in a huge for-profit hospital company that does abortions."

"As a physician, my professional ethics are grounded in preserving life, and I am opposed to abortion," the senator wrote.

"I would make exceptions for instances of rape, incest, or to preserve the life of the mother."

Both John McCain and Bill Frist are members of the global (one-world) government

advocacy organization, the Council on Foreign Relations(CFR). A major plank of

the New World Order platform is global population control, abortion being a primary

wicked means to that evil end.

2005 Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) Membership Roster

See a concise overview article about the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) on the internet at:

ww.thenewamerican.com/tna/1995/vo11no10/vo11no10_tyranny.htm

Steve Lefemine, pro-life missionary

dir., Columbia Christians for Life

Columbia, SC

July 19, 2006

w.geocities.com/benribqqq/cfr2005roster.html

Focus on the Family

citizenlink.org

Helping you defend the family

July 18, 2006

Senate, House Vote on Stem-Cell Bills

by Pete Winn, associate editor

The president is expected to veto a measure to expand federally funded research.

Congress today voted on three bills dealing with embryonic stem-cell research.

Unfortunately, one of the bills would expand the number of embryonic stem-cell lines

approved for federally funded research dramatically increasing the incentive for scientists

to kill living human embryos.

Senators voted 63 to 37 in favor of the bill, H.R. 810, which was strongly opposed by pro-life

groups and which President Bush has pledged to veto. The House passed the bill in 2005.

"It's disappointing because what this bill is going to do is just encourage embryo destruction with

taxpayer funds," said Dr. David Prentice, senior fellow for life sciences issues at the

Family Research Council.

Prentice said members of the Senate had been pressured by high-profile supporters of the research,

such as former First Lady Nancy Reagan, who lobbied hard in the last week.

"There has been so much hype and emotion around this and empty promises for cures for virtually

any disease known to mankind that many senators were probably afraid to vote against it," Prentice

told CitizenLink. "But the bottom line is, they didn't hear or certainly didn't listen to the successes

which patients have had using adult stem cells."

President Bush,who established a policy limiting federally funded research to certain

human embryonic stem-cell lines derived before Aug. 9, 2001, will issue his first veto,

according to the White House.

"The president believes strongly that, for the purpose of research, it's inappropriate for the federal

government to finance something that many people consider murder," said White House spokesman

Tony Snow. "He's one of them."

The Senate also unanimously approved two other bills. S. 3504, the Fetus Farming Prohibition Act

of 2006, prohibits deliberate human pregnancies in women or animals for the purpose of growing

an embryo or fetus to obtain tissue or stem cells for research.

The sponsor, Sen. Sam Brownback, R-Kan., was pleased at its passage.

"Mankind has always regretted it when the stronger take advantage of the weaker," he said. "We

should not treat our fellow humans, embryo or otherwise, as raw material. I’m pleased that all of

my Senate colleagues agree that human fetuses should not be developed for research purposes."

Carrie Gordon Earll, senior analyst for bioethics at Focus on the Family Action, said many people

don't understand that fetal farming is on our door-step.

"Passage of the fetal-farming bill is necessary because embryonic stem-cell research has been such

a failure," Earll said. "Embryonic stem cells are unstable and have a tendency to form tumors, so some scientists have moved to gestating animal embryos to the fetal stage and beyond in order to abort the

animal and harvest more developed, stable tissue. They've had some success with this approach and

that poses a risk for humans."

The Senate also passed the Alternative Pluripotent Stem Cell Therapies Enhancement Act, S. 2754,

that encourages scientists to search for stem cells from sources other than embryos.

Late this afternoon, the U.S. House of Representatives defeated S. 2754 on a vote of 273-154.

It required two-thirds to be approved.

The House also voted 425-0 to approve the fetal-farming bill, which now goes to the president.

So pending any extraordinary action only two of the three bills will now go to the president.

Amanda Banks, federal issues analyst for Focus on the Family Action, said the anti-life bill should be

done for this session.

"Although there's no doubt that members of the House who originally voted pro-life on H.R. 810 are

being lobbied to change their votes," she said, "neither the House nor the Senate appears to have

the votes to override the president's veto."

The first bioethics debate in a decade

The votes capped a day and a half of debate on stem-cell research, which was vigorous but not as

vigorous as hoped.

"I think it could have been a more robust debate," Prentice said. "But a number of senators, like

Sens. Brownback, (Rick) Santorum (R-Pa.), and (Tom) Coburn (R-Okla.), brought up the major issue

which is, how are we going to consider the youngest members of the human species? Are we going

to value all human life. I think it was extremely important to get that out on the record."

Supporters of embryonic stem-cell research championed it for what they called "the potential to cure

a host of diseases."

Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., a prime backer of H.R. 810, told his colleagues that his experience as

a cancer survivor had informed his decision.

"A century from now people will look back and wonder how we could even have this debate," Specter

said. "It is a clear-cut question to use embryos to save lives, which otherwise would be destroyed."

But opponents of the bill rejected arguments made by Specter and others that only left-over embryos

from fertility clinics would be used.

Sen. Jim Bunning, R-Ky., for instance, told his colleagues that "it is wrong to take these sources of life

and destroy them, even if it is for a benign purpose such as medical research."

"Just because the budding lives would not survive does not mean that we should ghoulishly conduct experiments on them," Bunning said. "Who knows how many human embryos we will have to destroy

before any tangible progress is made?"

Brownback appeared at a news conference Monday with three "snowflakes" children who were

once frozen embryos and adopted from in vitro fertilization clinics to put human faces to the

argument that frozen embryos could have a future.

Sen. David Vitter, R-La., said neither Congress nor independent researchers should be allowed to

"play God by determining that one life is inherently more valuable than another."

Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, meanwhile, at one point termed fetus farming, "science fiction," even though

he later voted in favor of the ban.

But Douglas Johnson, legislative director of the National Right to Life Committee, said today's

science fiction is fast becoming tomorrow's reality.

"The time gap between the time when someone asserts that certain things are unthinkable and

when advocacy groups define those same things to be essential can be as little as a year," he said.

Dr. Coburn, one of a handful of physicians in Congress, said history will vindicate President Bush’s veto

of H.R. 810 on the basis of science and ethics.

"The actual science of stem-cell research has already overtaken the debate in Washington," he said. "Scientists are discovering that the most promising avenues of stem-cell research do not require the destruction of viable human life. In fact, stem-cell therapies derived from non-embryonic sources are

treating more than 70 diseases, while embryonic stem research has produced zero therapies."

Earll also praised the president for showing what she called "uncommon character and courage in his

defense of young human embryos" in the stem-cell debate.

"His expected action to veto this bill will postpone and hopefully prevent the destruction of untold

frozen embryos," Earll said. "On the other hand, some members of the U.S. Senate who should

know better voted to destroy human lives and that goes beyond cowardice. We expected more

from Sens. Bill Frist, R-Tenn.,Trent Lott and Thad Cochran, R-Miss., and Mark Pryor, D-Ark."

TAKE ACTION:

Ask your representative to oppose an override of the president's expected veto on H.R. 810. The

override vote could happen as early as Wednesday.

If you are a CitizenLink Daily Update subscriber, click on the blue "Take Action" button in the e-mail

to be automatically logged in to our Action Center. Otherwise, click on this link.

(Paid for by Focus on the Family Action.)