Frist in Wonderland

Bill Frist: "I am pro life, I believe human life begins at conception," Frist said in a Senate speech. "I also believe that embryonic stem cell research should be encouraged and supported."

Now, if Bill had spent anytime with Socrates, he might be pushed to expalin how he can reconcile:

(1) I believe human life begins at conception (Pro-life)
(2) Embryonic stem cell research should be encouraged and supported.

Especially since (1), for the Pro-lifers, includes the hidden premises
(a) embryos=human life
(b) embryonic stem cell research destroys human life
Therefore: (c) Embryonic stem research destroys human life
Hence, we can rewrite (2): I am not Pro-life

Given that Frist argues he is "Pro-Life," so embraces (1) and subpremises (a-c), in the above sentence, he has contradicted himself:

(1) I am Pro-life and
(2) I am not Pro-life

What we have here, then, is a meaningless statement. Frist has violated the rules of intelligibility.

However, there is a way out! He can revise (1). Or--gasp--rethink the dogma of "Pro-Life."