The initiative is being "headlined" by prominent former senators, and promoted by local businesses - including those who wish to have the unencumbered license to carry out such research.

Locally, it has been made also into an economic issue, with the charge that to be against this type of cloning (called "somatic cell nuclear transfer," or SCNT) or against the destruction of human embryos for their stem cells is to be "anti-growth and development in Kansas City," "anti-jobs," "anti-cures," "anti-science," "anti-progress." The church is not any of these things, but draws an essential line concerning the means by which life-saving ends may be procured.

Over the last years, church institutions have been trying to educate people of good will about the real distinctions concerning the use of different types of stem cells for promoting cures. The church supports many forms of "adult" or post-natal stem cell research.

A recent article in the Sunday edition of the local daily newspaper told the story of a young person who had traveled to another country for surgical implantation of stem cells from the olfactory tissue of an aborted fetus, a process that shows true promise of curing spinal cord injuries.

The article regrettably failed to make the distinction that this is not a case of SCNT or embryonic stem cell research. SCNT and embryonic stem cell research has not been successful in any clinical human trial for the curing of a disease.

Similarly, the article failed to indicate that these kinds of adult stem cell therapies (using olfactory tissues to successfully treat spinal cord injuries) have been used from other, licit sources without having to rely on the immoral use of aborted human fetuses. For comparison, readers should research the case of Laura Dominguez, www.stemcell research.org/testimony/dominguez.htm who was treated with her own olfactory tissue, thus virtually eliminating the need for tissue matching. After her surgery, which took place in Portugal, she can now walk with braces. Ms. Dominguez testified at a hearing in Washington, D.C. in 2004, and the FDA is considering petitions to approve the therapy in the United States.

In a televised panel discussion this year, as well as in conversation with local researchers, I have suggested that if the appropriate institutes focused their resources on this morally acceptable research, Kansas City could become the world's center for the cure of any of a number of devastating diseases and injuries: diabetes, Parkinson's disease, leukemia, spinal injuries, and a growing list of other maladies. These have all been treated with some measurable degree of success, without having to clone human embryos or otherwise destroy human life at its beginning.

Though I do not underestimate the formidable effort and resources such research would take, there is real promise in these fields. Procedures could be perfected for very significant therapies and perhaps even definitive cures. These efforts would merit our support.

With the opportunities for this kind of success, why are we being asked to secure a constitutional license to protect destructive research that has not proven to be successful?

I applaud the considerable educational efforts of The Catholic Key, our diocesan agencies, Missouri Catholic Conference, Missouri Right to Life, Rockhurst University, the Harry J. Lloyd Charitable Trust, and others to provide solid educational information on the issues of stem cells and cloning. We need the help of these and other leaders to continue to teach this as clearly as we can.

I urge allCatholic and people of good will to disassociate themselves from any initiative that would protect human therapeutic cloning and, in effect, open the door to the destruction of human embryos for research.

Join me in thanking those priests and deacons who preached on this topic for the sake of a better understanding of the truth and the moral principles by which human life will be protected in all its stages.

Mary, Mother of Life: Pray for us!

END