ALS Ice Bucket Challenge creates chilly conflict with pro-life values

1While many Americans are pouring buckets of ice water over their heads in the name of research for Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), commonly known as Lou Gehrig’s Disease, few are aware of the life issues involved with this fundraising. The ALS Association, which has been the beneficiary of more than $22.9 million from the Ice Bucket Challenge, is involved in the use of embryonic stem cells for its research practices and has long been recognized as a research organization whose practices conflict with pro-life values. The Ice Bucket Challenge has participants either pouring a bucket of ice over their heads and posting a video on social media or making a donation to the ALS Association; many people have done both. The American Life League gives ALS Association a “red negative/minus sign” which “indicates that ALL does not consider the organization worthy of support from pro-lifers.” ALL notes that ALS Association is currently using a stem cell line from embryonic stem cells, by its own admission. ALL cites an email to ALL from Carrie Munk at the ALS Association in July of this year:

“The ALS Association primarily funds adult stem cell research. Currently, The Association is funding one study using embryonic stem cells (ESC), and the stem cell line was established many years ago under ethical guidelines set by the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS); this research is funded by one specific donor, who is committed to this area of research. In fact, donors may stipulate that their funds not be invested in this study or any stem cell project. Under very strict guidelines, The Association may fund embryonic stem cell research in the future.”

That should come as no surprise from anyone who researches the ALS Association. Its own website reports:

“The discovery that human embryonic stem cells can be isolated and propagated in the lab with the potential of developing into all tissues of the body is a major medical breakthrough. But it has raised ethical concerns.”

This ethical concern is one that pro-lifers have taken to task as the organization has used a fun gimmick to masks the tragedy of some of its research. Live Action President, Lila Rose said:

“It is noble to combat a deadly disease, and the ice bucket challenge definitely puts a fun spin on philanthropic efforts. That’s why it’s such a shame that the ALS Association, while striving to save some people, chooses to support research that thrives from experimenting on and killing tiny, innocent human beings. “Embryonic stem cell research, which requires the destruction of pre-born people, is inherently unethical and a violation of fundamental human rights, and even materialists must admit that promises of its benefits have failed to deliver. There is no good reason to condone this practice; in fact, all it does is taint the ALS Association, whom I’d otherwise be happy to support. “We can’t do evil for the sake of some hoped-for future good. If someone promised you that he might be able to save your life if only you’d let him kill someone else, would you take the offer?”

Other life leaders have chimed in on this issue over the years, as well as in response to the viral fundraising videos. Patheos notes that Saint John Paul II said in 2003:

“Any treatment which claims to save human lives, yet is based upon the destruction of human life in its embryonic state, is logically and morally contradictory, as is any production of human embryos for the direct or indirect purpose of experimentation or eventual destruction.”

Pro-life writer, Dr. Georgia Purdom said today:

“In the specific context, the ALS Association that is promoting the frigid challenge promotes an unethical search for a cure. Many researchers are willing to use embryonic stem cells and cells taken from ‘electively aborted’ fetuses to search for a cure. Undoubtedly, some of the money generated through this challenge will end up supporting these forms of research in one way or another. While it is difficult to make direct connections between the money you give and which trials those dollars go to support, the ALS Association does provide funding for research involving embryonic stem cells, including from aborted children.”

Perhaps one of the most notable aspects of embryonic stem cell research is that even Geron, a private company hailed as a leader in embryonic stem cell research, abandoned its work with embryonic stem cells in late 2012. Chuck Colson noted then:

“Its decision was due to the hard facts of economics: There’s no market for a product that doesn’t work! As you probably know, for years we’ve been told that the use of embryonic stem cells, which destroy human embryos — that is, people — will lead to miracle cures for all kinds of diseases and conditions. The problem for embryonic stem cell advocates is that they failed to produce a single cure.”

Just before Geron was abandoning embryonic stem cell research, ALS Association was recruiting for Phase 1 of this clinical trial, still listed as active, which announces clearly:

“These stem cells have been engineered from the spinal cord of a single fetus electively aborted after eight weeks of gestation.”

While it’s admirable to raise funds in such a creative way to cure such a debilitating disease, it’s disheartening to note that so much money is being invested in a medical research that has not shown significant results, and which compromises life. Meanwhile, adult stem cells have shown more promise in clinical studies. This study, publicized in 2011 by researchers in Tel Aviv was granted FDA approval in April to progress to Phase II in Boston. Evidence of the potential for healing from adult stem cells abounds. Stem cell research is vital but it needs to be done in an ethical manner that doesn’t cost a life to save one.

  • Lauri Martineau

    Is there anywhere we can donate money to support those with ALS where they do not do embryonic stem cell research?

    • Cynical_Meliorist

      Still have a few days, but saw this and wanted to throw some items out before getting back to things. :)

      There are a few websites which might help, or that you can look into. Note i’m adjusting the address so as not to place the comment in moderation, as you’ll see using [ ].

      One I’ve used before is http://www.myphilanthropedia [dot]org and found it to be very informative. It may assist you in evaluating non-profits.

      There are other groups, such as The Angel Fund, that are considered independent, but i’m not 100% sure if they use embryonic stem cells or not. You would likely have to ask them directly. You can visit their page at http://www.theangelfund[dot]org for information. Stem cells like this, however, are tightly controlled, so it’s possible they are using other methods to research, but again I cannot say that for sure.

      Likely, an internet search might bring up some other options I haven’t heard of or considered.

      Good Luck!

    • Alicia Lewis Gallardo

      The article above says you can donate and stipulate how your donation is used.

      • Susan Michelle Tyrell

        However, money is fungible, and if you donate to an agency for one thing, it simply frees up more money for other work. That’s how Planned Parenthood gets around taxpayer funding of abortion prohibitions. The more money it gets, the more it frees up so they can take the taxpayer money and “not” use it for abortion, but use the other donations for it. It’s all about the way the money is earmarked, but it still goes to the same place. Fungibility is an issue that is often ignored, but in the end, the same organization has a higher bottom line when it gets more money.

    • Christina Hartley

      Yes donate to John Paul II Medical Research Institute! !!

    • Tylei

      I don’t see why they can’t use somatic (adult) stem cells instead… you can harvest them from a healthy adult volunteer. No killing required, so everyone wins!

  • Rebecca Rose Downs

    I’m really relieved to say that not only is Regent University doing a mass challenge, but we just received an e-mail today that whatever money we donate will actually go to John Paul II Medical Research Institute. The reason given was for “life-affirming.”

  • Chris Barnes

    It is a mistake – and a HUGE one, to think that all of us who are fervently anti-abortion are also anti-stem cell research. To lump the two things together is a mistake of colossal proportions. They are NOT the same thing. It does not matter that the material for embryonic stem cell research comes from aborted babies. Those doing the research are not abortionists – and it is wrong, even to the point of being sinfully wrong, to attempt to combine the two groups.

    The truth is, the babies have already been killed. What has been done cannot be undone. Throwing the shell of what used to a person into the trash is wasteful. And frankly, it’s not Christian.

    • EL KEVBO

      Well then you’re talking about the desecration of a human corpse which is just as reprehensible as abortion. This is not in line with any Christian teaching or value that I’m aware of. No human being’s body should be used so that others can profit which is at the root of objection to embryonic stem cell research.

      • James

        First off, research for disease prevention or cure is not profit, it’s general human benefit. The word “Non-Profit” should probably have stopped half of your blind bashing before it came out.

        Desecration is a strong word for the advancement of science through research. Nothing in the Christian teaching ever suggests learning anything about the world except through the Bible, but I can guarantee you that’s a short-sighted aspect of a book over 2000 years old and translated/edited too many times to count. You’re preaching dark-ages mentalities and it’s hurtful to the advancement of the world.

        • EL KEVBO

          So no pharmaceutical companies profit? Who’s being naive here? You’re the one who interjected Christianity by suggesting that nothing in it is opposed to embryonic stem cell research, don’t get angry at me for bursting your bubble when you are so overwhelmingly wrong.

          It is obvious that you are anti-Christian or at the very least have some negative personal sentiments towards those of the Christian faith. Please do not accuse someone of “blind bashing” when you cannot even get your own stories straight in the first place.

          • Jam Jambo

            what amaze me is that most Christian have engaged themselves in this challenge unknowingly, I would challenge Christians out there to think before doing this.. remember, the devil is a liar. You don’t want devil identity marks all over you! be warned!

      • Yvonne Smith

        Then from what you are saying, transplanting of organs would be a desecration of a corpse, and they are used to save lives.

        • EL KEVBO

          Are you referring to voluntary organ donation? If so, there is a huge difference between someone volunteering to donate their organs after death and human lives being created to be used in experiments and then be subsequently destroyed. When the Nazis and Soviets were conduction scientific experiments on human beings the world was shocked and appalled upon finding out what they were doing. In America you can conduct research on human beings in the same vein and it is acceptable and even encouraged by some. Are good intentions enough to justify what is being done? Endless rationalization cannot undo the truth that these ARE human lives and there is nothing to necessitates embryonic stem cell research.

          • Yvonne Smith

            Look, I am pro life, I do not support abortions, however, I know people that have had them for a variety of reasons, God would love them and forgive them, who am I do be their judge? You have your opinion, I have mine, I just thank God these babies aren’t ending up in the garbage, but their life, as, short ad it may have been, is helping save lives. Let’s just agree to disagree.

          • EL KEVBO

            Nothing justifies abortion or embryonic stem cell research plain and simple. What you are talking about is the sin of presumption, it is the premeditation of committing to an action expecting God’s mercy without consequence. Essentially you’re thinking that you can play God for a fool and in this instance destroy his precious creation by placing your will above His. You’re right, I cannot judge them nor do I want to judge but you’re dead wrong with your relativistic attitude towards God. These lives are wasted and thrown in the garbage, you say I should not judge but then why should be people doing the research be able to judge as to the terms of the life and death of those they are doing research on? Obvious double standard based on what you’e stated.

          • Yvonne Smith

            You don’t know me, you have no idea or right to tell me I am playing God, I am not presuming or even justifying the act, but choosing to look at it in a positive way, Jesus Himself stopped a stoning of a woman based on law, you my friend in today’s time would be amongst those getting ready to hurl the stone. This ends the discussion, for it is very controversial, and going in a direction in which I will not travel, if I am wrong, may God show me…but until He does I will continue to believe that God has taken what Satan has meant for harm, …..that is placing it IN the HANDS of GOD.

          • EL KEVBO

            Jesus protected the woman from being stoned to DEATH. I DO NOT WANT THE DEATH OF ANYONE, why do you think I would be among those wanting to stone that woman to death? Your rationale is equivalent to, “Lets look at this in a positive way, if they stone her to death she won’t sin anymore!” I’m more than willing to forgive anyone but they need to stop in their sin, putting a positive spin on sin is one of the foremost of satan’s tactics. The researchers are taking the lives of these human beings into their hands much in the same way the people who were going to stone the woman were taking her life into their hands. How are you not seeing this?

          • Yvonne Smith

            First off, STOP twisting my words to suit your own need, I AM NOT putting a positive spin on sin, but the stoning went beyond her sin, it addressed theirs as well, Jesus not only protected her, He cared about and protected them. We ALL sin and fall short, and that ALL includes you as well as me, I am choosing to allow GOD to be judge, and show HIS mercy. Before Jesus addressed her sin, it was HIS MERCY and GRACE in which HE displayed first., this whole thing, conversation has spurred on bashing, now I ask you politely, let’s agree to disagree, and move on.

          • Moonlitereader

            I’m sorry. I am reeeally tired of people using the excuse, yes, I said EXCUSE, “It’s my opinion. Don’t judge me. Only God can do that.” Yes, only He can. AND. HE. HAS. He has judged MURDER to be a sin…pure and simple. And, abortion is murder! Pure and simple. Calling it what it is…is what some of us do. If you have a problem with it…take it up with God. It’s His word, and not His opinion.

          • Yvonne Smith

            You are hilarious, assuming that I believe in abortion, I don’t. ..let me ask you, have you committed murder? You will say no, but I say at some point we all have, in our hearts, and Jesus said if you even think it…
            Your next comment will be that He, was referring to committing adultery, I say read it again. ..it includes it all. If you can stand there in judgment of me with a clear consciousness, of not having broken any of the commandments, including the commandment on LOVE, then by all means hurl your stones, once again, I agree, murder is a sin, but so is pride, check yourself.

          • EL KEVBO

            No one said you believe in abortion, now you’re just tossing conjecture around. What exactly are you trying to prove? You’re saying to us “don’t judge” while up on your high horse contradicting your own words with every next statement.

          • Yvonne Smith

            Please remove me from your site, thank you

          • EL KEVBO

            I’m not twisting your words, I’m pointing out the fallacy in how you think in particular towards the value of human life. You’re the one acting as if I have offended you, yet you have continued this conversation. You won’t let it go, certainly not in the way you’ll let others off my the hook for doing what you claim to be against. You are lukewarm which is why you refuse to engage while also refusing to stay out.

    • Don’t try to teach facts to fear-mongerers

    • Tommy

      The issue isn’t about wasting human tissue from an already dead baby. It’s about creating a business that profits from the killing of babies. Its easy to stand back and say I am not a murderer. If you are profiting from the murder and use your profit to justify it, doesn’t that make you worse?

      • James

        Again, lets look at what philanthropy and especially the word “Non-Profit” means. Oh, yeah, NOT DESIGNED TO BE DRIVEN BY PROFIT!
        That’s why people are DONATING to these causes. If it were GE, and they PROFITED by selling dead human tissue, I understand your point. Yet, you and your high-horse have now gotten lost on your own trail. There is no profit motive here with a NON-PROFIT research foundation. It’s in the title…

        • Tommy

          nonprofit organization
          A nonprofit organization (NPO) is an organization that uses surplus revenues to achieve its goals rather than distributing them as profit or dividends. While not-for-profit organizations are permitted to generate surplus revenues, they must be retained by the organization for its self-preservation, expansion, or plans.
          Translation: non profits can and do make money. Almost every non profit out there has paid employees who receive a salary. This is the profit I am speaking of. As long as someone is making money at the cost of human life it creates a demand for more human life. The non profit is not the only people who gain from this too. Think about all the for profit abortion clinics who use stem cell research as a way of justifying their practice (which was an argument that was brought up when stem cell research was first introduced).

        • Rebecca Rose Downs

          Technically Planned Parenthood is considered non profit, so…

      • Yvonne Smith

        No, in my mind it does not, do we not have organ transplants? Some of those derive from a murdered body, just saying. So should we deny that person the right to receive an organ if it came from a dead body?And Since They have, Do We Call THEM murderer? In what us being stated, then transplanting of a person’s organs from a body of one who has passed in an unethical way would be just as unethical.

        • Tommy

          There are major differences between an aborted baby and a murder victim. First a murder victim has the opportunity to voice wether their organs are to be used once thy die. Second there is no industry that creates business for organ transplants (unlike abortion clinics that provide the corpses of infants). Third murder victims organs are not used in transplants. The reason for this is a murder victim must go through an autopsy. Due to how long a murder autopsy takes it is impossible to use those organs for transplant. There is a very small window after death that organs must be removed and placed into a new host to insure they are not rejected. A murder victim is also considered a risky doner due to unforeseen complications from injury.

          • Yvonne Smith

            GOOD point, I Didn’t really think about that aspect of it, but it doesn’t change my stance, I would much rather see these lives lost be used for saving lives as opposed to being thrown in to the trash. To me, it is a positive thing, we can’t stop abortion, I wish we could, but we can’t. It is sad, but what good would it do to oppose stem cell research asking them to just dispose of the aborted fetuses? I respect your views and the views of others which are the conviction of your hearts, but as for now, this is the conviction of mine. A logical solution to this would be, pulling the positive points from both sides of the argument and perhaps discover a new and better way.

    • Stormii

      While I don’t necessarily agree with your point, I see it. The two should not be comparable. Using dead bodies and killing live ones are two different things. Killing them doesn’t further anything except one’s convenience. The other could very well help a lot of people with terrible illnesses. It isn’t like their profiting from this. I know it makes people uncomfortable, but that’s a far cry from murder.

    • Yvonne Smith

      I agree with you, the conviction of my heart is that these babies lives are playing a role in saving lives. I oppose abortion, I believe in life at even before conception, for God says, ” before I even placed you in your mother’s womb”, to me, it is God taking what Satan has meant for harm and turning it for good. It is so much better than throwing them in the garbage.

      • You say “that these babies lives are playing a role in saving lives.” So how many have they saved? Do you have data that supports this?

        • Yvonne Smith

          Please remove me from your system

  • cam

    And this is supposed to make people feel better? It makes me feel worse. :-(

    • James

      It’s supposed to make you realize that from a functional point of view, this is no different than a body being donated to science after death.
      Sure, they didn’t get a say in it. But neither do pre-verbal children who pass away and are donated. If these embryos would have been “thawed” and destroyed, they’re already gone. Allowing them to be used for research is vastly more beneficial to society and the future of the human race.

      • Cindy Hendricks Campbell

        And that is exactly why in vitro fertilization is so ethically challenged and many pro-lifers are against it. Most ethical dilemmas have the same root – the end does not justify the means. To get one (or a few) babies, you must sacrifice the remaining lives. To get some embryonic stem cells you must create embryos. Life is being treated like a commodity and something that can be created only to be disposed of.

        • James

          Absolutely not disagreeing here. The issue is not whether IVF is right or wrong. I’m not about to get into that discussion because it’s a whole different ballgame.

          However.

          With the assumption that IVF is going on (we’re agreed here, yes?), and that there is a byproduct inherent in the vast majority of cases (we’re agreed here, yes?), and that in many of those cases the byproduct is going to be destroyed in one way or another (we’re agreed here too, yes?), then the best thing that can be done to make use of these resources and not waste them, is to forward research. Some of that research is for support of ALS.

          To me, maybe simplistically because I’m only looking at the details above, it’s a no-brainer. Research on.

          • EL KEVBO

            Perhaps you should advocate against IVF instead of advocating for the good intentions of the byproduct of IVF. You can only claim apathy at this point.

      • EL KEVBO

        Organ donors don’t register to donate their organs you say?

  • Ish

    Points well taken, but this is not the only
    source used to acquire embryos. Scientist have already cloned human embryos to
    harvest the stem cells. You’re using the embryo,
    a human life, as a means to an end. You’re going to create it to destroy it.
    Adult stem cells show much more success than using embryonic stem cell
    research.

    • James

      You clearly missed one of the more important points in the first line:
      “All the human embryonic stem cell lines currently in use come from…”
      Don’t hang the present on the mistakes of the past…

      • Ish

        I did not missed the first line. Scientists
        have been using cloned embryos for stem cell research for some time now. So
        either California Stem Cell Agency’s information is outdated or they’re plainly
        misleading people. Too much lies and deception about this subject area out
        there. Despite the hype surrounding
        them, embryonic stem cells actually have little to offer for treatment of
        disease. So let’s not waste life and
        resources on a research that shows little or no promise.

        • James

          So you’re saying that you’re both more knowledgeable and more well-informed than the official FAQ for an entity under constant scrutiny? I’d really like to know you in real life – you’ve got some awesome insider knowledge.

          But seriously, can we get back to the simple point that is very clearly made here: these are biological resources that were going to be “destroyed” anyway. They’ve already been wasted. There is (at this point) no way to change that outcome. So given that these will be wasted (as you phrased it) already, how about we avoid the waste and get additional knowledge and use out of these resources?

          How is that not the simplest and most logical way to respect the life resources we’ve got? In my opinion, respect is using these resources for the highest and best purpose available, and if an independent life of their own isn’t an option — research and the betterment of the rest of the species just got moved to the top of the list.

          Your inside knowledge aside, can you argue with that premise?

          • Carol Timmel

            My adopted embryo (blastocyst) is 8 months old and he is learning to walk. There are 800,000 just like him sitting in freezers, waiting to be born. We are blessed that his parents chose adoption over medical research and death for him. Embryonic stem cell research is abortion at it’s earliest stage. Day 6 is no different than week 6 or week 16. These unborn children are viable human beings and our son is living proof of that.

          • Erica Touchton Wolfe

            Carol, your argument doesn’t apply to James’ statement. Good for you and your son. If IVF parents choose to stop paying for storage, “the embryos are destroyed.” The parents can also choose to “donate”. So…you actually adopted an embryo from a freezer? Because you are implying that is the way it works. And as far as I know, neither the Bible nor Jesus has said anything about using embryos – not fetuses – for medical advancements and treatments of other LIVING human beings. Supposing ALL finds the embryos in the trash can – shall they leave them there to rot, or shall they rescue them and give meaning to their blessed, but extremely brief time on earth? Toss them or help God’s creation?

          • Yvonne Smith

            Good point

          • EL KEVBO

            Can you argue for why IVF and/or embryonic stem cell research is necessary instead of putting a positive spin on an intrinsic evil? All you are doing is rationalizing the use of a human’s life without justification.

          • EL KEVBO

            Your argument is based on your opinion and no one need argue within the parameters of your opinion.

  • Is there anything that DOESN’T present a conflict for you guys?

    • LoveTheLeast8

      Yes, ANYTHING is fine as long as living humans are not killed. Pretty simple.

      Just don’t shoot humans, cut them up, burn them, etc and are are good.

  • Samuel

    Here is a blog post answering the question: Can you be pro-life and do the ALS Ice Bucket Challenge? http://samuelhood.wordpress.com/2014/08/22/can-you-be-pro-life-and-do-the-als-ice-bucket-challenge/

    • Rebecca Rose Downs

      Great article! Thanks for that.

  • Carol Timmel

    My adopted embryo (blastocyst) is 8 months old and he is learning to walk. There are 800,000 just like him sitting in freezers, waiting to be born. We are blessed that his parents chose adoption over medical research and death for him. Embryonic stem cell research is abortion at it’s earliest stage. Day 6 is no different than week 6 or week 16. These unborn children are viable human beings and our son is living proof of that.

  • nicole valdez jasso

    Hi

  • Travis Muse

    I’m going to make an extremely crude comparison, and you will probably hate me for it. IDC…

    What if we were to put your view into another arena? Lets send Jane Doe cadavers from the morgue, over to the sexual predator wing at the prison, so the necrophiliacs can get their fix, and quit assaulting staff members. No one will be hurt, their families don’t know, because they were Jane Does, and in someones view, it does good.

    The reason you guys are squabbling is because some of us give these embryos the same respect as any other human. Others see this as a discarded tissue, like a popped zit.

    • Stormii

      Giving a sexual predator a “fix” and helping to cure a life threatening disease are two different things.

      • Travis Muse

        Maybe to you. That’s my point. What are you willing to do to someone else, to help yourself?

        • Stormii

          It wouldn’t help me, but it’ll be life saving to many others. Plus, it isn’t alive. I don’t consider doing something to a corpse doing “something to someone else”. I don’t view dead bodies like that. In the context of your scenario it wouldn’t work because one would be encouraging perverse thoughts instead of trying to rid them of it.

          • Susan Michelle Tyrell

            Nor are any aborted babies once they are aborted. So by that reasoning if someone else does the aborting then it doesn’t matter because the baby is dead.

      • Travis Muse

        Also, I’m no scientist, but I understand that adult stem cells are the ones with real promise.

  • John Kleiner

    As a radio worker, it is simply unavoidable to not know someone who’s taken the Challenge. A cousin of mine did it this week, as has President George W. Bush. If invited, I would do it, but under the condition that my donation is specifically directed to adult stem cell research. That said, any chill is very momentary compared to battling Lou Gehrig’s Disease.

    • Susan Michelle Tyrell

      Remember, even if you designate money, it frees up other money for the non life-affirming research. Why not give to the foundation others have listed that is ALSO doing ALS research but only on adult cells?

  • Thank you for this information…

  • Basset_Hound

    We lost my husband’s brother in 2011 because of this terrible disease. He was diagnosed in early July and died right before Thanksgiving.

    • Yvonne Smith

      I lost my grandfather

  • AllYouNeedIsLove

    So, because I’m Canadian, I checked the ALS Canada website. FYI: This is their stance:

    “ALS Canada funds peer-reviewed research (which goes through a rigorous peer review process by researchers in the Canadian scientific community) and funds research that is evaluated at a high level using international evaluation methods adopted by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research.

    The ALS Society of Canada does not fund any research employing totipotent cells which are derived from intact or modified human embryos and will not do so until there are federally established guidelines. ALS Canada encourages researchers to apply revolutionary methods that create stem cells from a patient’s own body to find treatments and cures for ALS.”

    (http://www.als.ca/en/research/stem-cells)

  • Valerie Finnigan

    In case nobody’s pointed that out yet, there are organizations like Team Gleason and the John Paul II Medical Research Institute devoted to research of neuromuscular disease, treatment, and support for people who have it without supporting embryonic stem cell research.

    When I took the challenge, I suggested supporting them, and I made my donation to Team Gleason.

  • Stormii

    Which is exactly why I can’t jump two feet into the pro-embryonic stem cell research groups. That, in my opinion, is the only problem. What people are talking about here is truly irrelevant to the abortion debate.

  • Cristina4Jesus

    We need to do an ice bucket challenge to raise money for pro-life.