Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: nickcarraway

I was VERY glad to hear the stem cell question asked in the debate last time. First time I've heard anything in the MSM about the difference between embryonic and adult stem cells, both in terms of hype vs. reality, and the tremendous difference in the cost of human life.

Pres. Bush continues to disappoint me in not articulating this important distinction, though I appreciate his support in the actual decisions. I think Bush treads lightly on abortion and other life issues. And, obviously, he has a much better political sense than I do of what the public is ready for.

Anyway, I'm very glad a lot of people heard about this last night.

-- Joe


8 posted on 10/09/2004 8:00:51 PM PDT by Joe Republc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Joe Republc
Pres. Bush continues to disappoint me in not articulating this important distinction, though I appreciate his support in the actual decisions.

I think Bush is trying to do everything he can to let Kerry paint himself negatively, while avoiding personally saying anything negative about him. I can understand why he's doing this, but at the same time I do wish someone would come out and ask what reason is there to believe that embryonic stem cells are likely to have any more promise than the adult-stem-cell therapies that are already showing results? I can think of some reasons why people might favor embryonic stem cell research, but none of them are morally good.

19 posted on 10/09/2004 11:53:19 PM PDT by supercat (If Kerry becomes President, nothing bad will happen for which he won't have an excuse.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

To: Joe Republc
...."First time I've heard anything in the MSM about the difference between embryonic and adult stem cells,"....

You would think with all the controversy, a reporter could "Google" this and report on it. The first I heard of stem cell research, I looked it up and low and behold, Adult and cord blood stem cells were giving great results, but ground up babies weren't working yet, in fact it was worse results. The idea was to get the cells before they committed to what they were supposed to be and manipulate them into growing into new cells that we forced them to be. The Adult stems and cord blood did well, so I couldn't figure out what the fuss was about.

You always have to think cynically when you analyze things about dead babies. It's for the MONEY! They are determined to find a use for soilent green so they don't have to throw them in the garbage. Then they could guarantee that abortion would remain legal so they could "cure" what ails ya.

The idea is to grow a new kidney or heart or even nerve tissue and tranplant it. The adult and cord cells help repair tissue but won't change yet. If they get embyo cells to grow to what they want, we will never stop abortion. They will even make it patriotic to kill your baby for science.

22 posted on 10/10/2004 12:49:25 AM PDT by chuckles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson