Skip to comments.U.S. House Passes H.R. 3: Embryonic Stem Cell Bill (253-174, short of Veto majority)
Posted on 01/11/2007 12:27:06 PM PST by cgk
Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act of 2007 - Amends the Public Health Service Act to require the Secretary of Health and Human Services to conduct and support research that utilizes human embryonic stem cells, regardless of the date on which the stem cells were derived from a human embryo. Limits such research to stem cells that meet the following ethical requirements: (1) the stem cells were derived from human embryos donated from in vitro fertilization clinics for the purpose of fertility treatment and were in excess of the needs of the individuals seeking such treatment; (2) the embryos would never be implanted in a woman and would otherwise be discarded; and (3) such individuals donate the embryos with written informed consent and receive no financial or other inducements.
To amend the Public Health Service Act to provide for human embryonic stem cell research.
253 to 174 - I thought the title was wrong.
Could you post the list of republicans who voted for this institutionalized cannibalism? My 'goodriddance' senator, Frist, was in favor of this cannibalism. If he hadn't run for cover, I and many like me were set to work for whomever ran against him for the nomination.
We're not obtaining a sustainable population number, but yet abortion still has support? Guess that says quite a lot about people's lack of long term outlook- just because we're an abundant population now doesn't mean we are goign to remain one- we're are in serious trouble because parents are not having enough children to sustain our population- this nation WILL dissappear, but abortion advocates could care less as long as women can presently have sex without the consequences of prenancy impeeding on their lifestyles. pleasure over common sense.
The following link does not relate to this thread http://sacredscoop.com
We should sponsor legislation in every state to require that every representative post a voting position on every vote made in our name. That statement should clarify and clearly state the representatives position on the issue.
ESC research is and has been legal. If corporations want to spend money to slaughter embryos, they are free to do so WITH THEIR OWN MONEY.
When is America going to wake up to the fact that if companies that spend billions on medical research won't spend money on this the only logical conclusion is that there is no substance to this media-created hype?
More of the Democrat dog and pony show that will go no where in the end.
Sorry about my typo; I've asked the Moderator to correct that for me.
I'm looking for the list, but it hasn't been updated on Thomas' site, yet... and I can't find it anywhere else either. It should be up shortly.
Cardinal Justin Rigali, Archbishop of Philadelphia and Chairman of the Committee for Pro-Life Activities of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops yesterday sent a letter to members of Congress who tomorrow will consider Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act of 2007 (H.R. 3), which would amend the Public Health Service Act to provide for human embryonic stem cell research. A PDF of the Cardinals letter is available at this link. Excerpts below:
. . . this is not a matter of supporting vs. opposing progress . . .
. . . After almost three decades of research in mouse embryonic stem cells and nine years in the human variety, researchers can scarcely point to a safe and effective cure for any condition in mice let alone human beings . . .
. . . At the same time, ethically sound research using non-embryonic stem cells has continued to advance, helping patients with over 70 conditions in early peer-reviewed studies (see www.stemcellresearch.org) . . .
. . . It now seems that virtually every byproduct of live birth - amniotic fluid, amniotic membrane, placenta, cord blood, and the tissue of the umbilical cord itself - contains stem cells that may rival embryonic stem cells in their flexibility. In other words, the frozen embryo so sought by researchers as mere research material is not likely to provide cures in the foreseeable future. Yet if the same embryo were allowed to survive and be born, instead of being killed with Congresss approval, his or her birth may provide more beneficial stem cells for human treatments, including treatments for this same childs medical conditions . . .
"This calls for a team meeting, Mal."
I don't think the President has been very effective in arguing his side of this issue.
I think he would be far more effective if he claimed some supporters of stem cell research are trying to create an embryo industry in this country.
Johnson, E. B.
Sánchez, Linda T.
Davis, Jo Ann
Lungren, Daniel E.
re: post #16. You can scratch what I was saying about Bilbray.
GERON is having success with animal models, but they are harvesting ESC and then cultivating them until they are equivalent to the stem cells harvested from amniotic fluid before placing them in the animal hosts! But you can guess which harvesting methodology will get the godless media support and air time!
Those in favor of poking at tiny humans in petri dishes constantly say, "These embryos would be discarded anyway!"
Why is that? Why would you create embryos only to destroy them? This doesn't make any sense. Can someone help me understand? :-)
I don't even need to look to know that my man Roscoe Bartlett voted AGAINST this - it's nice not to have to worry about House Resolutions. At least there I know I have sombody who always votes as I would. In any event, no worries about this bill - this is essentially the same bill Bush vetoed the last time around and he will just do so again, if need be.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.