l.i.f.e.letter  "Life Is For Everyone"   
LIFE Coalition, Fargo, ND

Heading toward a Brave New World of human cloning:
Doublethink, destructive embryonic research and John Kerry

By James Horsley

Fargo, ND--October 25, 2004--We are being ushered into the horrors of a "brave new world" of cloning, embryonic stem cell research and reproductive control by the deceptive practices of the elites: judges, lawyers, politicians, physicians and scientists.

The weapon of this war against the values of America is semantics by means of the redefinition of common words, resulting in a vocabulary of "doublespeak," where, for instance, cloning is labeled not cloning and a cloning ban is really the legalization of cloning.

This con job has been made possible because ordinary citizens have lost the ability to think critically, lulled by the mass media, which promotes a culture of sex and violence, and the public schools, which have excised training in ethical values, into believing that pleasure and consumption without morals is happiness.  The result has been the development of a sense of entitlement to false rights: that there is a transcendent right to do what we want in private and that the right of sex trumps the right to life.

Those most impacted by this new age philosophy are the unborn and those who want to protect the unborn.

Brave New World and 1984
This collapse of civilization was envisioned by two novels of dystopias, Aldous Huxley's Brave New World, published in 1931, and George Orwell's 1984, published in 1948.

Brave New World opens up with a tour of students through the state's great grey building of 32-stories, the Central London Hatchery and Conditioning Center, which had over the main entrance "in a shield, the World State's motto, Community, Identity, Stability."

The students entered the ground floor. "'And this,' said the Director opening the door, 'is the Fertilizing Room.'" The Director was also known as the World Controller.

In a temperature controlled room, the students saw racks after racks of test tubes, some filled with ova, others with semen, with hundreds of workers mixing batches. In another room were rows and rows of bottles of developing embryos from which would be decanted babies.

By means of what was called the "Bokanovsky's Process," an embryo could be stimulated to clone itself up to 96 times, creating 96 identical twins that could grow to man as many identical machines. By means of oxygen deprivation, embryos were made into compliant workers, all the way from "Alphas," the elites (who were not deprived of oxygen), down to "Epsilons," the laborers, who were severely deprived to stunt their mental growth.

There were no fathers and no mothers and no pregnancies. Women wore contraceptive belts and promiscuity was a virtue. In the case of a conception by natural means, there was an Abortion Center. If you had a problem, you took soma, a tranquilizer. To adapt future demand to future industrial supply, recordings in the communal nurseries played.

"'I do love flying,' they whispered, 'I do love flying, I do love having new clothes, I do love...

"'But old clothes are beastly,' continued the untiring whisper. 'We always throw away old clothes. Ending is better than mending, ending is better than mending, ending is better...'"

This use of repetitive jingles foreshadowed the social and economic conditioning now being brought about by the media today through advertising, biased news coverage and amoral programming.

In Orwell's 1984, society was controlled by the Ministry of Truth, located in a pyramidal concrete structure. On its white facade were the Party's slogans: War is Peace, Freedom is Slavery, Ignorance is Strength.

The primary way that the Party controlled the population was by means of "doublethink," also called "doublespeak" and "newspeak." As stated in 1984:

"This...was the most frightening aspect of the party regime--that it could obliterate memory, turn lies into Truth and alter the Past. The Party slogan was 'Who controls the past controls the future; who controls the present controls the past.' This was where 'doublethink' came into play, minds were trained to hold contradictory positions simultaneously and unquestioningly--for example you had to believe at one and the same time that Democracy was impossible and that the Party was the guardian of democracy."

Random House Webster's College Dictionary (1991) defines "doublethink" as "the acceptance of two contradictory ideas at the same time."

We are entering the door to this new world now.

Senate Bill 303
An example of doublethink employed to get us another step into the anti-utopia of Brave New World is United States Senate Bill 303, authored by Orrin G. Hatch, Republican senator from Utah, and co-sponsored by Presidential candidate John Kerry, Democrat senator from Massachusetts. It is called the Human Cloning Ban and Stem Cell Research Protection Act.

It should be called the Clone and Kill Act, that is, if the author and supporters of this bill were to reflect the reality of what the bill permits and prohibits. The act specifically allows scientists to create human embryos so their embryonic stem cells can be extracted. The process kills the days-old unborn child, according to the August 20, 2004 news release by LifeNews.com.

The act begins by stating that:

"Congress finds that (1)the National Bioethics Advisory Commission...has reviewed the scientific and ethical implications of human cloning and has determined that the cloning of human beings is morally unacceptable; (2) the NBAC recommended that Federal legislation be enacted to prohibit anyone from conducting or attempting human cloning, whether using Federal or non-Federal funds..."

It then goes on to state that: "It shall be unlawful for any person...to conduct or attempt to conduct human cloning" but that "Nothing in this section shall be construed to restrict areas of biomedical and agricultural research or practices...that involve the use of...nuclear transplantation to produce human stem cells."

Moreover, it states that "Research involving nuclear transplantation shall be conducted in accordance with subpart A of part 46 of title 45, ...Code of Federal Regulations..."

Nuclear transplantation is the basic process used in cloning. It involves transferring the nucleus of a human body cell into a female egg from which the nucleus or all chromosomes have been removed. By saying that there shall be no restriction to "nuclear transplantation to produce human stem cells" and that "Research involving nuclear transplantation shall be conducted..." legalizes a form of cloning, as long as it is done in conformity with regulations in the Code of Federal Regulations. Legalizing this process, therefore, seems totally contradictory to the findings of Congress, which label cloning "morally unacceptable," as well as the bill itself, that makes human cloning unlawful. So, how can the bill both legalize cloning and ban it, at the same time? Only by doublethink.

Subpart A of part 46 of title 45 of the Code of Federal Regulations states in section 46.209 that:

"...a fetus ex utero may not be involved as a subject in an activity covered by this subpart, unless: 1. There will be no added risk to the fetus resulting from the activity, and the purpose of the activity is the development of important biomedical knowledge, which cannot be obtained by other means, or 2. The purpose of the activity is to enhance the possibility of survival of the particular fetus to the point of viability."

However, according to the bill's "fourteen-day rule" the clone, a blastocyst, must be killed after being alive 14 days. The bill states: "An unfertilized blastocyst shall not be maintained after more than 14 days from its first cell division." In cloning, the blastocyst or embryo is never fertilized, for one is making a duplicate of an animal by non-sexual means. The process does not involve the combination of genetic material via sperm and egg, but it does end in creating a living organism.

The bill's provision to kill the cloned being thereby relegates it to the status of a research object. Such cloning is known variously as "research," "experimental" and "therapeutic" cloning. Reproductive cloning is when the blastocyst or embryo is allowed to grow in a uterus full term, such as the cloned Dolly the sheep.

Experimenting on the cloned being without implantation in a uterus not only puts it at risk, but mandates that it be destroyed in 14 days. So, again, how can the bill both legalize cloning and ban it at the same time? And how can it mandate its death, when it purports to adhere to the Code of Federal Regulations that assures the fetus is not subject to undue risk?

The bill accomplishes these semantic wonders by its opening salvo, namely, the section on definitions. Definition number one states the following:

"The term 'human cloning' means asexual reproduction by implanting or attempting to implant the product of nuclear transplantation into a uterus."

According to this bill, human cloning is only cloning when the cloned cell, the blastocyst, that is, the embryo, is transplanted into a uterus. This is exactly the same thing as saying that a space ship is not a space ship until it docks with a space station. Further, if the embryo is not attached to the uterus, it can not develop into a fetus, thereby circumventing the regulatory provisions protecting the fetus. You can not protect what does not exist.

On the other hand, Republican Senator from Kansas Sam Brownback's proposed bill, S. 245, is straightforward. It amends the Public Health Service Act to prohibit human cloning. According to the proposed bill: "The term 'human cloning' means human asexual reproduction, accomplished by introducing nuclear material from one or more human somatic cells into a fertilized or unfertilized oocyte whose nuclear material has been removed or inactivated so as to produce a living organism." It does not redefine embryo as only being an embryo upon implantation, but instead, an embryo is an embryo fertilized or not, attached to the uterus or not attached.

Roe v. Wade
The same type of semantic slight of hand evident in the Cloning Ban bill is what enabled Roe v. Wade to permit abortion. It is this word trickery that is the foundation on which is being built all related legalized destruction of the life of the unborn.

Semantics also allowed the Nazis to justify the extermination of the Jews by robbing them of their personhood, calling them "untermenschen," that is, subhuman. By taking the status of personhood away from a person, the subject may be treated as vermin. Unwanted, unborn children, because of the semantic distortions of Roe v. Wade, are viewed as pests and can be exterminated as pests.

It would seem that America's most basic historical documents would protect unborn persons from having their lives taken.

The Fourteenth Amendment states that:

"No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

The Declaration of Independence states that:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."

However, via doublethink, the unborn have been denied these basic protections. In the majority opinion in Roe v. Wade Justice Harry A. Blackmun decided that:

"...the word 'person,' as used in the Fourteenth Amendment, does not include the unborn."

He also concluded that the consequences of abortion was not the termination of a human life:

"...we...would not have indulged in statutory interpretation favorable to abortion in specified circumstances if the necessary consequence was the termination of life entitled to Fourteenth Amendment protection."

The reason that abortion today is not considered the termination of a human life is because the unborn have been defined as not human, not persons, that is, subhuman. However, if this were actually the case, then what is not human, what is not a person and what is subhuman, produces upon birth a human. This is the logical fallout of doublethink--nonsense.

The reason for this subterfuge is the necessity to cover up what is really being done. What is being proposed is the destruction of a human life to improve or save a human life.

In terms of the Brave New World, it is the activities of the "Alphas," that is the elites, to benefit themselves at the expense of the life of the "Epsilons," in this case the unborn. To sacrifice a life to save a life has always been repugnant to Western Civilization when the life being sacrificed has not consented. A hero is a person who throws himself on a grenade to protect his friends. A murder is someone that throws a friend on the grenade to protect himself.

To justify the destruction of human life through medical experimentation, doublethink is used in legislation and in court decisions.

The Angel of Death
Scientists become criminals when they sacrifice lives through experimentation to improve or save lives. For instance, Josef Mengele, nicknamed the Angel of Death, a physician at Auschwitz, the Nazi concentration camp, conducted medical research on Jewish twins.

Robert Jay Lifton, a professor of psychiatry and psychology at the John Jay College of Criminal Justice, City University of New York, in The Nazi Doctors, explained that the purpose of Mengele's experimentation on twins was in part to explore how multiple births came about so as to more quickly double the size of the German race through genetics.

He had a special dissecting room in which were porcelain sinks and a dissecting table of polished marble. Here live twins were often operated on to examine their hearts, stomach and other bodily parts without anesthesia. They were photographed and measured. Blue dye was injected into brown-eyed subjects to see if he could change eye color to conform to Aryan standards. When the experimentations were completed, he would often lay his subjects on the operating table and inject a lethal drug into their hearts, terminating their lives.

According to Lifton, "Mengele saw himself as a biological revolutionary, part of a vanguard devoted to the bold scientific task of remaking his people and ultimately the people of the world..." through genetic improvements. He justified the killing of his subjects because, according to Lifton, they were going to die in the gas chamber anyway.

Cloning and stem cell research
As mentioned, there are two types of cloning, "therapeutic" cloning and "reproductive" cloning. Therapeutic or experimental cloning results in the destruction of the harvested embryo. Reproductive cloning results in the production of a twin.

There are two types of stem cell research, embryonic stem cell research and adult stem cell research. In one form of embryonic stem cell research, the nucleus of the embryo is replaced with the nucleus from the body of another organism of the same species. This is what is called cloning. Instead of being transferred to a uterus to grow into a living fetus, in embryonic stem cell research using cloning, the resulting stem cells are harvested from the embryo for experimental study. This destroys the embryo.

Adult stem cells are grown in a Petri dish, instead of an embryo, and thus do not involve the destruction of an embryo.

Stem cells, both via adult and embryonic cell growth, are capable of differentiating into the body's various cell types, such as heart, nerve and blood cells. Researchers are trying to develop stem cell therapies for most of the diseases and debilities that afflict us, such as neuron cells for Parkinson's, Huntington's and Alzheimer's diseases and spinal cord injuries, cells to replace damaged heart tissue and cell therapies for cancers and the regeneration of organs for transplants. One of the advantages being studied is the possibility that such stem cells will be able to produce organs that will not be rejected because of immunological incompatibilities.

Opposing views
We have two competing views that can be summed up by the following experts.

On August 9, 2001, President George W. Bush spoke to the nation on his opposition to certain aspects of embryonic stem cell research. He said that, "I strongly oppose human cloning, as do most Americans. We recoil at the idea of growing human beings for spare body parts, or creating life for our convenience. And while we must devote enormous energy to conquering disease, it is equally important that we pay attention to the moral concerns raised by the new frontier of human embryo stem cell research. Even the most noble ends do not justify any means."

"In regard to the potential of stem cell research," countered Dr. Lawrence I. Boncheck, special consultant, Lancaster General Heart Institute, Lancaster, Pennsylvania, "there is a certain irony in using the term 'pro-life' to describe a policy that would sacrifice countless people, suffering from myriad diseases, to save fertilized eggs. Even if we regard excess 'pre-embryos' as humans, we should see them not only as what they are, doomed clumps of cells that will never be implanted in a uterus nor develop their potential as humans, but as the noblest they can be: foot soldiers in the global war against disease. The President's opposition to their use in that war can therefore be viewed as incompatible with his duties as Commander-in-Chief."

In support of the President's view, "Embryonic stem cell research that involves the creation and destruction of human embryos," according to Dr. Gerard Magill, executive director of the Center for Health Care Ethics, Saint Louis University, "is unacceptable in a nation with a social conscious."

Forced suicide troops in any war would appear incompatible with Judeo-Christian values.