Stem Cell Lunacy

Discussion in 'Religion and Ethics' started by liberalogic, Jul 18, 2006.

  1. liberalogic
    Offline

    liberalogic Member

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2006
    Messages:
    539
    Thanks Received:
    48
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    NJ
    Ratings:
    +49
    Stem cell veto would be Bush first
    Health: Lawmakers predict votes for Senate passage, but not override.
    By Laurie Kellman, Associated Press Writer

    http://www.presstelegram.com/news/ci_4060745

    WASHINGTON - Will he or won't he? Supporters of a bill to allow federal financing of embryonic stem cell research are hoping something will happen to change President Bush's mind about vetoing the measure awaiting Senate approval.

    It would be Bush's first veto of any legislation but - so far - the president appears to be standing firm in his determination to block the stem cell bill.

    Neither the House nor Senate has demonstrated enough support for the bill to override a veto, though the House probably will try, just to give Bush a definitive victory in the showdown.

    Supporters of the research hold out faint hope that Bush, presented with new data and pressured by election-year politics, might reverse course and sign the bill.

    "This would be his first veto in six years, on something that the vast majority of the public supports," said Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa. "What would come down on him would be all the scientists, all the Nobel laureates and everyone else who supports it."

    Polls show that 70 percent of the public supports the bill, which would expand federal aid for embryonic stem cell research. The process is believed by many scientists to hold the most promise for curing diseases such as juvenile diabetes, Alzheimer's and Parkinson's that strike millions of people.

    Set for House action are bills to protect the Pledge of Allegiance from court challenges and a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage, which failed in the Senate. Bills to encourage stem cell research from sources other than embryos also are expected to be voted on this week.

    But it is the Senate's stem cell bill that probably will draw the most attention - and Bush's first veto.

    In 2001, Bush halted federal funding of new embryonic stem cell studies, comparing them to abortion because the process of extracting the crucial stem cells destroys the days-old


    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Advertisement


    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------



    embryo.

    He said at the time that such federal support for research could continue on the 78 stem cell lines then thought to exist. But in the years since, the National Institutes of Health have confirmed that a fraction of that number of lines exist and that few, if any, are viable for clinical trials.

    Supporters hope that development might change Bush's mind. But the White House, struggling for election-year credibility with its conservative base, has left no wiggle room in its public or private statements.

    White House adviser Karl Rove last week said Bush was "emphatic" about his intent to veto the bill. White House spokesman Ken Lisaius said Friday the president would follow through if the bill came to him.

    That could happen this week. Vote counters on both sides of the debate in the Senate say at least 60 votes for the bill exist - perhaps as many as 64; that's enough to pass it. But 67 votes would be required to overturn a veto if all 100 senators are present.

    GOP Sen. Trent Lott, who said he will vote for the bill and predicted it will pass the Senate, said Sunday he believes "something could be worked out."

    The House was 50 votes short of its two-thirds majority when it passed the bill last year, 238-194. House leaders were planning for a veto override attempt as soon as Bush vetoes it, probably before week's end.

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------


    It's worth noting that even if you're pro-life, you should support stem-cell research. Most of the embryos used are from fertility clinics, where they are eventually discarded anyway. So the President would rather waste life than use it to save life.

    A vote against this bill is not only unethical and immoral-- it is disgraceful. Maybe this is simply a ploy to keep people sick in order to fill the pockets of pharmaceutical companies. Or maybe, just maybe, it's mental retardation at its finest.
     
  2. pegwinn
    Offline

    pegwinn Top of the Food Chain

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2004
    Messages:
    2,549
    Thanks Received:
    329
    Trophy Points:
    98
    Location:
    Texas
    Ratings:
    +329
    I oppose abortion. But, if we make use of the aborted fetus's then maybe some good can come out of all the bad. According to the NIH Adult and Cord cells also have some miracles just waiting to happen. Abortion and Organ Transplants have something in common. Someone has to die.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 2
  3. Hobbit
    Offline

    Hobbit Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2004
    Messages:
    5,099
    Thanks Received:
    420
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Near Atlanta, GA
    Ratings:
    +421
    See, this is where you, through no fault of your own, are misinformed. Nobody's blocking stem cell research, just federal funding of embryonic stem cell research. So far, adult and umbilical stem cells have actually pulled off several medical miracles and get a crapload of private funding because of how valuable the research is. All forms of stem cell research have been going on for 50 years. During the same time that adult and umbilical cells have been producing miracles, embryonic stem cells have only been able to cause INCREDIBLY malignant cancer. If there was half as much of a future in embryonic stem cells as its proponents would have you believe, they'd be in the same boat as adult and umbilical stem cells, chasing investors off with a stick. The moral argument is also valid. I want abortion to stop. If 'valuable' medical research results from abortion, how much harder do you think it will be to stop?
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  4. theHawk
    Offline

    theHawk Registered Conservative

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2005
    Messages:
    10,830
    Thanks Received:
    2,062
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Location:
    Germany
    Ratings:
    +5,715
    There is zero reason every taxpayer should be forced to fund this. If you believe its a good cause,....*gasp*....DONATE your own damned money to the cause.

    What a concept eh? :blowup:
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  5. Dr Grump
    Offline

    Dr Grump Gold Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2006
    Messages:
    19,263
    Thanks Received:
    3,042
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Location:
    From the Back of Beyond
    Ratings:
    +4,181
    \

    Got a credible link to this little nugget?
     
  6. jillian
    Offline

    jillian Princess Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2006
    Messages:
    69,550
    Thanks Received:
    13,012
    Trophy Points:
    2,220
    Location:
    The Other Side of Paradise
    Ratings:
    +22,426
    OMG! He really said that?!?!?!?!?!? Funny, Israel and South Korea have done tons of stem cell reasearch and had huge advances in treating spinal injuries. That's a new one! (Could be because it's simply untrue).
     
  7. Dr Grump
    Offline

    Dr Grump Gold Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2006
    Messages:
    19,263
    Thanks Received:
    3,042
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Location:
    From the Back of Beyond
    Ratings:
    +4,181
    My money is on him producing an op-ed piece from a religious site...:teeth:
     
  8. Hagbard Celine
    Offline

    Hagbard Celine Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2005
    Messages:
    1,756
    Thanks Received:
    61
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    Ratings:
    +61
    You are wrong. Embryonic stem cells were not isolated and grown until 1998 when James Thomson of the University of Wisconsin first isolated and grew them there. Also, embryonic stem cells have never caused cancer. It is theorized that they COULD cause cancer if they are used in therapies before they are fully understood.
     
  9. jillian
    Offline

    jillian Princess Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2006
    Messages:
    69,550
    Thanks Received:
    13,012
    Trophy Points:
    2,220
    Location:
    The Other Side of Paradise
    Ratings:
    +22,426
    Ya think? :banana:
     
  10. rtwngAvngr
    Offline

    rtwngAvngr Guest

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2004
    Messages:
    15,755
    Thanks Received:
    511
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +511
    From where do you derive your values grump? The doctrine of totalitarian pragmatism? AKA, the dehumanization of others to the extent that you get the majority to go along with it?
     

Share This Page

Search tags for this page

cell lunacy