Editor's note. Please send your comments to daveandrusko@hotmail.com. If you have a chance, please read Part Two--"Judicial Wars."

Pro-lifers in Minnesota turned back still another "clone and kill" proposal when pro-life Republican Gov. Tim Pawlenty vetoed the measure sponsored by two Democrats, State Rep. Phyllis Kahn and State Sen. Richard Cohen. While the veto cannot be overridden because the legislative session has ended, Pawlenty took the issue so seriously he took the time to carefully elaborate his objections and his alternatives.

S.F. 100 was approved last year in the Senate and in the House this month. The measure would have not only have authorized the University of Minnesota to spend millions of dollars of state money on human embryonic stem cell research, it would also have required that researchers face felony charges if they did not destroy the human clones.

As per usual the bill was wrapped in assurances that nothing "unethical" would have been authorized because there would be an "oversight committee." Pawlenty, however, was not fooled.

In his message, he reiterated that he "support[s] stem cell research that is consistent with sound ethical and moral standards." Pawlenty then offered a specific list of acceptable alternatives which many have argued are both uncontroversial and much more likely to result in benefits to patients.

Noting that stem cell research is "evolving rapidly," Pawlenty touted the use of adult stem cells. "This creates ample opportunity to work towards lifesaving cures without crossing core ethical and moral boundaries," he wrote. "We should encourage this science."

In his veto message Pawlenty highlighted two 2007 studies (previously talked about in this space) which demonstrated that adult skin cells can be reprogrammed into stem cells--called pluripotent stem cells (IPSCs)--that are essentially indistinguishable from embryonic stem cells. Unlike embryonic stem cell research, "no human eggs are required and no human embryos are destroyed" with IPSCs.

The law (which pro-lifers called the Kahn-Cohen Cloning Bill) would have funded research that used so-called "spare" embryos from fertility clinics. State Rep. Kahn, a veteran anti-life legislator and chief House author, used this to argue that "Nothing in this bill allows the destruction of a human embryo destined for life."

She then turned objections to public monies being expended on their head. "For people who have ethical concerns, you have to have public funding," she said. "That's the only way you get public oversight."

Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life (MCCL) led the opposition. Andrea Rau, MCCL legislative associate, observed that leaders in both the Senate and House sought to deceive the public, claiming the deadly Kahn-Cohen Cloning Bill would "ban human cloning." In fact, the legislation specifically sanctions human cloning and requires the University of Minnesota to kill all cloned human beings or face felony charges, she said.

"The attempt by radical legislative leaders to legalize human cloning has failed," said Rau. "Minnesota citizens do not support clone-and-kill experiments that treat human life as mere raw material for experimentation."

See Part Two: "Stark Contrasts Between McCain and Obama in Judicial Wars"