Futuristic Luddite(John Kerry respects science if it advances the destruction of life.)

The American Prowler ^ | 10/13/2004 | George Neumayr

[nickcarraway]

The same Democrats who derided the science of Ronald Reagan's "Star Wars" program now believe in the futuristic science of "Superman" stem-cell research. "When John Kerry is president, people like Christopher Reeve are going to walk," promises John Edwards, sounding far more credulous and superstitious than the Southern preachers liberal Democrats disdain.

In this evening's debate, Kerry is expected to speak about "science" and its importance to the nation's future. President Bush should remind the audience that Kerry wasn't always so enthusiastic about futuristic science. In the 1980s, he opposed Reagan's nuclear missile defense plans with the zeal of a Luddite. Kerry called the science of missile defense "dangerous," "crazy," and hubristic -- adjectives he has never applied to embryonic stem-cell research.

"It's guaranteed to threaten the heavens -- the one line we haven't yet crossed with weaponry: the heavens," he said as he called on his colleagues to vote against a nuclear missile shield.

Recently Kerry chastised Bush for spending "billions" on the "unproven" science underlying nuclear missile defense. Bush has a "near obsession with missile defense," he said.

Kerry's suspicions about science vanish when he talks about spending money on his obsession, the unproven science of embryonic stem-cell research. Kerry prefers his science fiction liberal. He won't spend billions on using missile defense science to address the nation's security needs. But he will use the money of taxpayers to experiment on crushed embryos in the hope that handicapped celebrities will one day walk.

Most scientists regard the scenario of stem-cell research raising celebrities from their wheelchairs as improbable. Missile defense is far more promising. But Kerry distrusts science for national security, considering it a diversion from the real needs of the country. After all, as Kerry has said, a nuclear shield could alienate allies and give America a unilateral edge over the rest of the world. Reagan's Strategic Defense Initiative, Kerry said, threatened "mutual restraints of antimissile defense…essential to maintenance of the stability of the superpower balance."

A nuclear missile shield is a chilling thought to Kerry. Can Americans be trusted with it? he wonders. But he is confident that his countrymen can handle cloning. Kerry's ominous comments about a nuclear shield interfering with the "heavens" reflect an environmental preciousness and piety never seen in his comments about science involving destroyed embryos. Perhaps it is time for an Endangered Embryo Act to update the species list environmentalists like Kerry always vote for. The pet hamsters of Senators have more rights than the hundreds of thousands of embryos Kerry intends to transform into spare parts for science.

Kerry's concept of science is corrupt. His attempt to dignify the wholesale destruction of embryos with the name of "science" or "progress" won't make it any less barbaric. Science is supposed to support life, not destroy it, empower all mankind, not empower one group of men over a weaker group of men. Kerry's reservations about nuclear missile defense are far more appropriate to the Brave New World science he advocates. A nuclear shield is designed to save lives; the research Kerry advocates will necessarily result in the ongoing destruction of life.

According to Kerry we are supposed to mourn the lost potential of Christopher Reeve, but rejoice in the lost potential of human embryos sacrificed to science. When Kerry was asked in the second debate why he supported science that requires killing embryos, he said that the embryos were headed for the trash anyway. He was indulging in a moment of crassness he would never allow himself were the subject elephants instead of embryos. Discarding embryos or experimenting on them is a false choice. The former altar boy forgot the third choice: Let them live.

It is typical of liberalism to create a crisis -- "We have 200,000 embryos just lying around," liberals like to say -- then use that crisis to create a new crisis. Kerry suggested in the second debate that the gross manipulation of embryos would stop with those left in the limbo of In Vitro fertilization. The research he favors on stem cell lines wouldn't come from "aborted" babies, he said. What solicitude for aborted children: Kerry doesn't think they have a right to life, but he will protect their right not to be experimented upon? Under Kerry we would go from taxpayer-funded abortion to taxpayer-funded embryo destruction to taxpayer-funded cloning. There's no piety in Kerry for "the heavens" now.

[Alexandrite]

I found Bush's answer to the question of Stem cell morality in the 2nd debate to not be conservative at all. He said that he was the "first president to fund stem cell research" Does this mean that he used federal dollars from our taxes to advance the cause of destroying life? *confused*

[weegee]

John Edwards: "Elect me and you will believe a man can walk."

I knew there's a reason Edwards reminded me of televangelists:

[weegee]

Listen to his answer again. He said that he OPPOSED federal funding of fetal stem cell research. His answer may have included a statement to the effect that he was not PROHIBITING fetal stem cell research.

[Alexandrite]

THIS is what Bush said in the debate. Look up the transcript.

BUSH: "Embryonic stem-cell research requires the destruction of life to create a stem cell. I'm the first president ever to allow funding -- federal funding -- for embryonic stem-cell research. I did to because I too hope that we'll discover cures from the stem cells and from the research derived."

Just curious as to why he calls himself a conservative and says things like this. No real republican would stand for murder even if it benefitted others medically. How does this gel with his abortion beliefs and morality?

[weegee]

I am in error in part but here is the FULL quote you have deliberately taken out of context (Moby?)

I pointed out President Bush's position. His clarification of Kerry-Edward's distortion of his position.

Here is the transcript from the FIRST debate:

The Second Bush-Kerry Presidential Debate

LONG: Senator Kerry, thousands of people have already been cured or treated by the use of adult stem cells or umbilical cord stem cells. However, no one has been cured by using embryonic stem cells.

Wouldn't it be wide to use stem cells obtained without the destruction of an embryo?

KERRY: You know, Elizabeth, I really respect your -- the feeling that's in your question. I understand it. I know the morality that's prompting that question, and I respect it enormously.

But like Nancy Reagan, and so many other people -- you know, I was at a forum with Michael J. Fox the other day in New Hampshire, who's suffering from Parkinson's, and he wants us to do stem cell, embryonic stem cell.

And this fellow stood up, and he was quivering. His whole body was shaking from the nerve disease, the muscular disease that he had.

And he said to me and to the whole hall, he said, "You know, don't take away my hope, because my hope is what keeps me going."

Chris Reeve is a friend of mine. Chris Reeve exercises every single day to keep those muscles alive for the day when he believes he can walk again, and I want him to walk again.

I think we can save lives.

Now, I think we can do ethically guided embryonic stem-cell research.

We have 100,000 to 200,000 embryos that are frozen in nitrogen today from fertility clinics. These weren't taken from abortion or something like that. They're from a fertility clinic. And they're either going to be destroyed or left frozen.

And I believe if we have the option, which scientists tell us we do, of curing Parkinson's, curing diabetes, curing, you know, some kind of a, you know, paraplegic or quadriplegic or, you know, a spinal cord injury, anything, that's the nature of the human spirit.

I think it is respecting life to reach for that cure. I think it is respecting life to do it in an ethical way.

And the president has chosen a policy that makes it impossible for our scientists to do that. I want the future, and I think we have to grab it.

GIBSON: Mr. President, a minute and a half.

BUSH:Embryonic stem-cell research requires the destruction of life to create a stem cell. I'm the first president ever to allow funding -- federal funding -- for embryonic stem-cell research. I did to because I too hope that we'll discover cures from the stem cells and from the research derived.

But I think we've got to be very careful in balancing the ethics and the science.

And so I made the decision we wouldn't spend any more money beyond the 70 lines, 22 of which are now in action, because science is important, but so is ethics, so is balancing life. To destroy life to save life is -- it's one of the real ethical dilemmas that we face.

There is going to be hundreds of experiments off the 22 lines that now exist that are active, and hopefully we find a cure. But as well, we need to continue to pursue adult stem-cell research.

I helped double the NIH budget to $28 billion a year to find cures. And the approach I took is one that I think is a balanced and necessary approach, to balance science and the concerns for life.

Welcome to FR. What do you have to say about the article of THIS thread?

[weegee]

Punk the prez? - Moby's anti-Bush tricks (Posted on 02/09/2004)

One of Sen. John Kerry's celebrity supporters is ready to pull out all the stops to get him elected. Republicans are shrieking over a suggestion by rocker Moby that Democrats spread gossip about President Bush on the Internet. "No one's talking about how to keep the other side home on Election Day," Moby tells us. "It's a lot easier than you think and it doesn't cost that much. This election can be won by 200,000 votes."

Moby suggests that it's possible to seed doubt among Bush's far-right supporters on the Web.

"You target his natural constituencies," says the Grammy-nominated techno-wizard. "For example, you can go on all the pro-life chat rooms and say you're an outraged right-wing voter and that you know that George Bush drove an ex-girlfriend to an abortion clinic and paid for her to get an abortion.

"Then you go to an anti-immigration Web site chat room and ask, 'What's all this about George Bush proposing amnesty for illegal aliens?'"

Moby didn't claim that he believed the abortion story.

[snip]

[Alexandrite]

I didn't delibately take it out of context. Life is life. The fact that these lives were already destroyed is irrelevant. Does one purposely use science that was achieved in a wrong way? Morality is NOT like virginity, it is not destroyed forever just because the person before you did the wrong thing. If Bush truly believes that obliterating these stem cell line swas murder, than his allowing any "progress" taken from these deaths to be used is unconscionable.

What's a "moby"?

[weegee]

See post 7. You come here and immediately go off the article into your own antiBush screed.

I have pointed out his position. Do you support Kerry? Maybe you have another candidate to rally behind?

Welcome to FR. Mighty early in the morning to be signing up.

[weegee]

Why are you so irritated with Bush's capped federal funding of fetal stem cell research when you should be on the front lines prohibiting ALL fetal stem cell research GLOBALLY?

[Alexandrite]

As far as this article and what we were talking about goes...

I'm not seeing a substantial difference in either candidate this election year, on science or any other issue. Both waffle, both are hedging their bets to shore up their bases and trying to attract moderates and swing voters at the same time. I've found a good website(cheney talked about it in the VP debate) Factcheck.org

It slams inncuracies on both sides of the aisle,(and brother, there are LOTS)and its quite enlightening.

Kerry and Bush don't understand science, they just pretend to. Badly.

[Alexandrite]

Wow. I just asked a question, trying to understand Bush's policy here,(as an anti abortionist) and I get accused of going off on an anti-bush tirade? Don't feel bad, I pick on both candidates, because I'm not terribly fond or impressed by either one.

But youre right, It is late. I'll stay up for a bit longer, then I must head for bed.

[weegee]

There are only 3 references to Bush in that lengthy article. You trolled.

If you don't see a genuine difference between Bush and Kerry on science or any other issue at this stage, you are hopeless.

[weegee]

Edwards Stem Cell Vision: 'We will stop juvenile diabetes, Parkinson's, Alzheimer's and other debilitating diseases... When John Kerry is president, people like Christopher Reeve are going get up out of that wheelchair and walk again.' Edwards made the unprecedented campaign promises during 30-minute speech at Newton High School gym in Newton, Iowa...

[Alexandrite]

Hopeless and a troll? I thought we weren't supposed to insult each other or be abusive in this forum? Did you read the agreement? I just asked a question, weegee kind of answered it, and accused me of being 'Moby'. The singer? The whale?

It's called a debate folks, if ya cant answer a simple question without insulting each other, then it isn't a true debate. And if It's not a debate, then why are we all here?

[datura]

FactCheck.org might as well be the self justification center for the DNC. They're so far left of reality, that cBS wouldn't even quote them.

So what was that about your agenda again, troll?

[weegee]

I question why you would come to a conservative forum in the wee hours to post a rant unrelated to the points in the article.

I posted a related thread to show that your posting behavior follows the suggestion of the singer known only as "Moby" (not his real name, he is a decendant of Herman Melville).

If abortion is such an issue to you, there are plenty of threads on just that topic. You may even find some threads about Bush's stance on fetal stem cell research. But I question why you join a conservative forum to lash out at Bush on a thread about Kerry's stance on stem cell research.

[Alexandrite]

If fact check.org is far left, then why did DICK CHENEY tell people to go there during his VP debate to get the real information about him and halliburton?(he said .com by accident, but he meant .org)he didn't do anything wrong as CEO either, which the site would tell you, if you chose to look at it. Like I said, it grabs innaccuracies on both sides of the aisle, which is a good thing. A falsehood is still false, no matter who says it.

Another person being abusive. Did you read the service agreement?

[datura]

I think he decided to move along. At least we know to keep an eye on him.

[Alexandrite]

OK, I'll go to an abortion topic then. This was a stem cell research topic, but apparently, stem cell question are out of bounds. Asking someone to explain to me the contradictory views Bush is showing is not "lashing out" at him. I want to understand where he's coming from on this, but using research that you know came from what you think is murder, I'm trying to understand how this is justified as an anti-abortionist. I didn't focus on Kerry in this issue because I've already concluded that he is full of it.(obvious) He believes life begins at conception but it pro-abortion and a catholic? It is to laugh!

Never listened to Moby speak. I don't want to hear the political stances of musicians, and his music stinks anyway.
He has one good song, and that's because Gwen Stefani is in it.

BTW- what difference does it make what time I create a new account? I'm off work tomorrow, so I'm up WAY later than usual, trying to enjoy mt time off on a computer I haven't been able to use nearly enough of late.