June 10 , 2005 - A Roundtable on Politics, Ethics, and Science

The Center for Bioethics and Culture Network invites you to a discussion on Propostion 71.

On November 2, 2004, there were two votes of enormous strategic significance for America and the world: George W. Bush was re-elected to the White House, and Proposition 71 was voted through by the people of California to fund with $3 billion (plus another $3 billion in interest charges) stem cell research, focusing on research not funded by the feds - including research cloning, or "therapeutic cloning," the technique famously promoted by Ron Reagan, Jr., at the Democratic National Convention.

Prop. 71 forms a key part of a global debate about biotechnology and human nature that has vast implications for the human future and may come to dominate the 21st century. In his first televised speech to the American people, in August 2001, President George W. Bush announced that for the first time the federal government would fund research on embryos, but only on cell-lines from embryos that had already at that date been destroyed. This would enable basic research, while not encouraging what he saw as unethical embryo destruction. By passing Prop. 71 California not only decided to go its own way on funding embryo research, but specifically embraced "somatic cell nuclear transfer" (aka cloning) to make the embryos.

In a way that was so unlikely that most people (including the press) largely ignored it, Prop. 71 was opposed both by pro-life conservatives and by pro-choice feminists - three of whom, including Judy Norsigian of Our Bodies, Ourselves, one of the most famous feminists in the world, actually signed the formal rebuttal to the proposition. Their anxieties about the implications of Prop. 71 for women, whose eggs are harvested for this research, has led some key supporters of 71 to re-think. Stem cell backer Senator Deborah Ortiz and conservative Senator George Runner have introduced a legislative package to protect the public's investment in stem cell research.

Meanwhile, around the world, the United Kingdom has taken the lead in pursuing a Prop. 71-style approach that favors cloning embryos for research, while many nations have acted to ban "therapeutic cloning," even though some of them have more liberal policies on using "spare" in vitro embryos for research. Nations where it is a felony include Canada, Australia, Switzerland, France, Norway, and Germany. And the United Nations Declaration on Human Cloning, passed earlier this year by a nearly 3-1 majority, urges all nations to outlaw all forms of cloning.

The Prop. 71 conference brings together key players from all sides of the debate. Come and join us!

Distinguished speakers and participants:

• Debra Greenfield, J.D.
  Fellow, Institute on Biotechnology and the Human Future
• William Hurlbut, M.D.
  Stanford University
  Member of the President's Council on Bioethics
• Francine Coeytaux
  Founder, Pacific Institute for Women's Health
• Nigel M. de. S. Cameron, Ph.D.
  Chairman, Center for Bioethics and Culture Network
  President, Institute on Biotechnology and the Human Future
• Dana Cody Esq.
  Executive Director, Life Legal Defense Foundation
• John Garcia
  Angel Strategies, LLC
• Lisa M. Krieger
  San Jose Mercury News writer
• Bruce Goldman
  San Fransisco biotechnology and medical research writer
• Hank Greely, J.D.
  Director, Stanford Center for Law and the Biosciences
• Thomas F. Budinger, M.D. Ph.D.
  Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory

LOCATION AND TIME:

Friday, June 10, 2005
10:00AM - 4:00PM

Crowne Plaza Cabana Palo Alto, CA