President Finds His Veto Pen (embryo stem cell research)

[Lunatic Fringe]

WASHINGTON (AP) President Bush has issued the first veto of his presidency, rejecting a bill to expand federal research on stem cells obtained from embryos.

[HayekRocks]

If you split one cell off and the other goes on to be born, then the cell you split off has the same potential and you are still destroying a life.

Suppose adult stem cells have that potential, but we don't know how to harness it yet?

[Petronski]

You trivialize the crimes of Mengele with such an absurd comparison.

Not at all.

The truly chilling part is that you can't see the connection, and your blindness is so bad that you want the government funding genuinely-evil Mengelian efforts.

What's your connection to that funding? Looking forward to a juicy grant?

[conservative blonde]

You have chosen a perfect Freep name. You are a "lunatic" if you think President Bush was grandstanding the conservative right. Bush has been pro-life since he ran for President. This embryonic stem cell issue is an issue of whether or not we as a people are going to condone and support the killing of beginning human life. Even you, "lunatic" were once a human embryonic stem cell.

[Teacher317]

A sad day for many people with Spinal Cord Injuries, and other issues that this research could help

Can you point to any evidence (not merely conjecture) that embryonic stem cells would be better suited for this research than adult or spinal cells from those who can give consent, and can survive the procedure?

Also, didn't this bill simply say that federal money would not be used on it, and that private funding of such research is still allowed? If so, then those with such injuries are not in any worse position at all.

[Jedidah]

". . . what do you think of the argument that if we should not be allowed to destroy embryos to research for cures, why should couple be able to make them through in-vitro when they cannot conceive?"

I find it all very troubling and morally wrong, but I am increasingly convinced that government cannot fill an ethical/moral vacuum.

In the case of today's veto, the President refused to let government (and our tax dollars) support something that he, and many Americans, find reprehensible.

However, in the personal lives of individual Americans, I don't know that government can dictate moral choices (sexuality, promiscuity, lifestyle, perhaps even abortion)or enforce laws designed to control them.

Rather, society and its pressures have always been the strongest and most effective force in pressuring its members to live ethically and morally.

That, of course, is where we have failed. We have allowed the anything-goes, me-first, personal happiness crowd to dominate our culture.

The question is when and whether good, God-fearing Americans can reclaim the attention and admiration of a society going bad.

[dirtboy]

Shrubbie, You're doin' a heck of a job!

Nothing like using DU terms on FR.

P.S.: A zygote is not even a fetus, much less a human being.

So tell me, then, how you managed to bypass the zygote stage and be born human. Your way is the way of diminished humanity. Nothing to be proud of.

[af_vet_rr]

Do the majority of the people who voted for Bush support a veto of this kind of stem cell research funding? That's the real question. It's a two-party system, with all the consequences that entails.

I'd say it was a moot point since he is not going to be running for office again. It's also difficult to answer with polls, as many times people what people would say in a poll is not necessarily what they believe in private life, and yes, while it's a two-party system (unfortunately), because it is a two-party system, we'll never know what the American public really wants, as this will be just one more issue amongst many.

[stillonaroll]

Way to go. Bush goes against the majority of Congress and 70% of American people to push his personal religious point of view.

I’ll correct that for you: “...to push the point of view of the pro-life base of the Republican Party."

Mr President, where was your veto pen when it came to CFR, bloated budgets, and dozens of other bad bills????

I do agree with you on your second point, that he should have vetoed early and often.

[ohioWfan]

OK. I can tell you're REALLY ANGRY.

Why don't we talk sometime when your brain is in control of your feelings?

Then you might make some sense.

[Oliver Optic]

“We hold these truths to be self evident: that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights."

Please, we have asked you fundy Bible thumpers to stop shoving your religion down our throats on this thread.

Where'd you get that quote from anyway ... Pat Robertson?

(/sarc)

[pageonetoo]

All embryos are living. They have to be killed to harvest their stem cells.

How are dead cells effective? I must be missing something. I understand the idea of an embryo, and I understand that it is a life. But, it seems that to grow them they must be alive. Do they use cells from just aborted babies, or do they use other sources for this material.

Is this different from Jesus spitting into the dirt, and using the mud to help heal a blind man? Of course, iI am not likening the action to Divinity!

[Famishus]

An apple seed is not an apple tree.

And if you destroy it, it never will be, either.

But we have a bunch of brainwashed fools who let their religion rule their lives. Pathetic.

They're not the 10 Suggestions, you know. And yes, they are carved in stone.

[Smile-n-Win]

Human life over spare parts.

What you call "spare parts" were intended to save human lives.

If I were President, would I have vetoed this bill? You bet: there is no section in the Constitution that empowers the Federal Government to fund medical research. But I would have vetoed many other bills for the same reason--such as the one that forbids Americans to criticize their government--not only the one that would have saved lives, albeit with the wrong source of funding.

[ohioWfan]

btw, you DID know that this was a thread on stem cell research and not immigration, didn't you?

I thought so.

[B Knotts]

I do no such thing. This kind of farming of humans is extraordinarily immoral.

[EternalVigilance]

*grin*

[hocndoc]

In fact, the President's voting constituency is behind him.

The "70%" statistic is only in those polls that first fraudulently "educate" that embryonic stem cells are the "best hope" according to the "experts."
More information:
http://www.eppc.org/programs/bioethics/publications/programID.35,pubID.2665/pub_detail.asp
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YjliM2MwZTU1MzI5NTc2ZWFhNTE1NmMwNzNhZDA3MGM=

[Cobra64]

Because no company is going to invest money that won't produce returns for 40 years.

You are probably right. Interferon comes to mind. The difficulty is that when doing research, it's tough to tell when your research finds is successful in finding a solution. Then you can add the usual 10-12 years for FDA approval.

(I worked with quite a few pharmaceutical companies like Glaxo and Wyeth.)

[newzjunkey]