Amendment 2 Debate
A TV ad for the amendment states, "It would outlaw any effort to clone a human being," although that's disputed by some.
"It makes it appear that no cloning is permitted while, in fact, some cloning is permitted and some cloning is prohibited," said MU law professor Phil Peters.
Amendment supporters said therapeutic cloning is not the same as human cloning. But, Missourians Against Human Cloning and other opponents disagree.
"We believe this is an embryo and, whether it comes from a fertility clinic or whether it's a cloned embryo, when you harvest the stem cells, it dies," said Patty Skain of Missouri Right to Life.
"The ballot language, which is the summary, was first approved by the Secretary of State's office," explained former state Rep. Vicky Riback Wilson of Columbia. "It was appealed, it went to court, and a judge ruled that the language was not misleading and could stay on the ballot."
The Missouri Coalition for Lifesaving Cures said stem cells could provide cures for diseases such as cancer, diabetes and Parkinson's.
"I think the promise of embryonic stem cell research is the main reason and, if we allow it to be banned in the state, it will leave open the possibility that people in the state will not benefit from therapies that could arise from this type of biotechnology," said Mark Kirk, MU professor of biological science.
"Whichever one of those perspectives accords with your sense of right and wrong, makes sense to you, sort of resonates right, I think should dictate how you vote," Peters said.