by Nikolas T. Nikas and Dorinda C. Bordlee

Dear Mr. President:

It is deeply troubling that the words that you speak with such conviction at events such as the National Prayer Breakfast are completely at odds with the abortion and human embryo research policies that you espouse and have begun to implement with the use of our tax dollars.

As citizens of the United States, we affirm your profound statement at the 2009 National Prayer Breakfast:

"There is no God who condones taking the life of an innocent human being. This much we know.'

We likewise join you in the sentiment expressed in your inaugural address:

"The time has come to reaffirm our enduring spirit; to choose our better history; to carry forward that precious gift, that noble idea, passed on from generation to generation: the God-given promise that all are equal, all are free, and all deserve a chance to pursue their full measure of happiness.'

Your surprising words convey an understanding that it is gravely immoral to condone, much less to fund, the "taking of the life of an innocent human being' who "deserve[s] a chance to pursue their full measure of happiness.'

If we know this much Ð that "there is no God who condones taking the life of an innocent human being' Ð then we are entitled to an explanation from you, Mr. President, as to why the United States of America condones it, promotes it, facilitates it, and pays for it.

Your words can be consistent only upon the premise that the in vitro human embryo or the child in the womb is not a "human being.'

We note your answer to Pastor Rick Warren during the 2008 Saddleback Forum that even from a "scientific perspective, answering that question [of when life begins] with specificity is above my pay grade.' This answer echoed the statement by Justice Blackmun in the 1973 Roe v. Wade opinion:

"When those trained in the respective disciplines of medicine, philosophy, and theology are unable to arrive at any consensus, the judiciary, at this point in the development of man's knowledge, is not in a position to speculate as to the answer' to the "difficult question of when life begins.' 410 U.S. 113, 160 (emphasis added).

President Obama, in the thirty-six years that have passed "in the development of manÕs knowledge' since the promulgation of Roe, science has progressed to the point that the question of when life begins can be definitively determined to the second. In fact, the intricate details of the biological processes pinpointing the exact moment of when life begins are thoroughly yet cogently expressed in a 2008 White Paper authored by stem cell researcher and embryologist, Dr. Maureen Condic.

The paper recognizes that "resolving the question of when human life begins is critical for advancing a reasoned public policy debate over abortion and human embryo research." The paper "considers the current scientific evidence in human embryology and addresses two central questions concerning the beginning of life: 1) In the course of sperm-egg interaction, when is a new cell formed that is distinct from either sperm or egg? and 2) Is this new cell a new human organismÑi.e., a new human being?"

The paper concludes that "based on universally accepted scientific criteria, a new cell, the human zygote, comes into existence at the moment of sperm-egg fusion, an event that occurs in less than a second. Upon formation, the zygote immediately initiates a complex sequence of events that establish the molecular conditions required for continued embryonic development. The behavior of the zygote is radically unlike that of either sperm or egg separately and is characteristic of a human organism. Thus, the scientific evidence supports the conclusion that a zygote is a human organism and that the life of a new human being commences at a scientifically well-defined 'moment of conception.''

The paper's conclusion is "objective, consistent with the factual evidence, and independent of any specific ethical, moral, political, or religious view of human life or of human embryos."

We respect and welcome pluralistic views on questions of philosophy, religion and morality; however, we submit that these disciplines that help shape our public policy on the issues of human life and bioethics must first be informed by what can be determined with scientific certainty.

Mr. President, in your inaugural address, you pledged that "[w]e will restore science to its rightful place.' At the advent of your administration, we urge you to base your public policy positions on the very science that reveals the moment that each of our lives began -- at the moment of conception. We urge you to acknowledge the unassailable science that reveals the humanity of the least amongst us.