A Multi-headed Beast

I don’t know if it was a compliment or a slam when Connie Farrow, spokeswoman for the Missouri Coalition for Lifesaving Cures, recently told David Lieb of the Associated Press “Our opponents are a multi-headed beast, and we've yet to see all of its [sic] faces."

Working for the Coalition, I know Ms. Farrow is accustomed to seeing only the face of Jim Stowers (and maybe his wife Virginia) who has bankrolled virtually the entire cost of promoting Amendment 2 (nearly $30 million). Ms. Farrow is right for a change. Amendment 2 is so riddled with deceptions, immoralities and inconsistencies that there are a host of opponents, ranging all the way from traditional Christians like the Missouri Baptist Convention, to liberal feminists like Hands Off My Ovaries.

But I think to see the beast Ms. Farrow should locate a looking glass.

It is the Coalition’s amendment that bears beastly qualities. Opponents of Amendment 2 seek to protect human life, not clone it to kill it to research it to manipulate it to profit from it. It is not beastly for persons with diseases and injuries to oppose a proposal that potentially might offer them cures. It is sacrificial and honorable for them to oppose it. They rightly see the immorality of destroying human life to supposedly benefit human life and they are willing to suffer with their diseases rather than see human life degraded into a research commodity.

Neither is it beastly to protect women. We are already rushing to protect women who might find themselves in difficult financial circumstances and become lured into giving their bodies to researchers for promises of money. Risks of egg harvesting are present and given the astronomical need for female eggs to accomplish the needed research, the statistical numbers of women who will face health problems is alarming. Rather the beast is on the other side—viewing real women with names and faces and life stories as mere egg donors to be enticed into extraction by the promise of dollars.

And what beastly quality is exhibited by protecting Missouri taxpayers from having to fund this immoral practice? Or preserving the legislative process, allowing for reconsideration and even oversight of public spending? What beastly attribute is exuded by preserving 45 sections of the Missouri Constitution (3 of which are within the Bill of Rights), sections which may well be changed, repealed or modified if Amendment 2 is approved?

We are multi-headed to be sure. But we are no beast. Join me tomorrow in slaying the real beast facing Missouri and vote NO on Amendment 2.