Well, I decided to actually read the full text of this initiative and stop relying on what all the talking head, pundits, politicians, prognisticators, prevaricators, movie stars, etc were saying.
Here is what the text in 38(d)2(1) says regarding cloning:
"(1) No person may clone or attempt to clone a human being."Looks like it explicitly prohibits "cloning" right?
WRONG, WRONG, WRONG.
Anyone casually flipping through the proposed legislation will be totally fooled into believing that it prohibits cloning.
Here's why -- the initiative doesn't use word definitions as the common man and general public understand them. This is a very common trick politicians use to fool people about the real nature of a particular piece of legislation. They use words and phrases people know and understand intuitively, but then include other language in the legislation to ALTER and CHANGE the legal definition of those words and phrases so they legally mean something else entirely.
This is exactly what is going on with the Missouri initiative. Here's the kicker down at the bottom of the initiative [38(d)6(2)] where "cloning" becomes explicitly permitted by virtuse of redefinitional hokus pokus:
(2) “Clone or attempt to clone a human being” means to implant in a uterus or attempt to implant in a uterus anything other than the product of fertilization of an egg of a human female by a sperm of a human male for the purpose of initiating a pregnancy that could result in the creation of a human fetus, or the birth of a human being.As you can plainly see, they've redefined the phrase: "Clone or attempt to clone a human being" to be legally something TOTALLY DIFFERENT than what ordinary people would interpret it to be.
What we have here is explicit permission to clone as long as the resultant cells are not "implanted in a uterus". Grow'em in a petri dish for as long as you like. Let the resultant cell blob grow as large as it can get. You could even grow it to term into a full blown ready to be born human as long as you avoided ever putting it in a uterus.
Why this shifty redefinitional legedermain? Obviously the proponents of this initiative full well intend to have cloning proceed at full speed if it is passed. If not, they wouldn't have felt the need to include the redefinitional weasle words giving "clone or attempt to clone" a completely different meaning than common usage might suggest.
Simply put, the proponents of the initiative are flat out lying in their public presentations about the nature of this initiative, and when someone lies like this, they do it because they know people won't accept it if they tell the truth about it.
For the record, I have no moral problems with cloning or stem cell research. I would love for someone to clone me up a fresh pancreas if they could.
My problem is with the intentionally deceptive presentation of this initiative. I don't like it when people try to con the public.