Current Events

TOPICS:

Previous

PAGE: 

1 ... 

36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40

 ... 426

Next

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2

Next

Aaron_Lariviere

Aaron_Lariviere

Los Angeles, CA
May 2007

JUN 09, 2007 02:28 PM





You have to hand it to George W.: he's got the brainpower of a headless chicken, but the guy sticks to his guns. As he's proven with Iraq he doesn't deter from the course, rather, he sees it through no matter the absurd and painful consequences.



Just this week, Congress put forward a new bill that would relax the restrictions on federal funding for embryonic stem cell research. The bill looks promising, and basically says that, if passed, the government would dish out the necessary cash to fund stem cell research using embryos that would otherwise be discarded from in vitro fertilization clinics. That's like mashing two potatoes with one fork: we'd be cutting down on biohazard waste (probably not much of a threat to world happiness, but still) and we'd get to recycle excess fruit of the womb by using it for crucial research.



Naturally, things aren't that simple: there's an enormous, stubborn, half-retarded ogre guarding the bridge to our dreams of untold stem cell derived riches. George W. Bush has squashed these dreams of a better future before, and like the arch-villain he is, he's vowed to do it again. The AP quotes him as saying:

If this bill were to become law, American taxpayers would for the first time in our history be compelled to support the deliberate destruction of human embryos. Crossing that line would be a grave mistake. For that reason, I will veto the bill.



To his credit, at least he has a reason. I'd hate to think he was maliciously annihilating the dreams of thousands of suffering people for the sport of it. I think I'm even beginning to wrap my head around his point: we wouldn't want to destroy something before we threw it away, because that would be… mean?



Even if this bill doesn't pass - and it won't - at least Congress is showing the initiative to try and make a progressive change for the better. With a different monkey on the throne, our country might just have some better luck getting decent legislation passed, and hopefully our future will be that much brighter.

dante42

dante42

Columbus, OH
February 2007

JUN 09, 2007 04:09 PM

It's things like this that make me wonder why our country's veto power is in the hands of one person, instead of a group.

hadees

hadees

Austin, TX
December 2003

JUN 09, 2007 04:16 PM

dante42 said:
It's things like this that make me wonder why our country's veto power is in the hands of one person, instead of a group.



It is in the hands of a group. Congress can override Presidential vetos.

dante42

dante42

Columbus, OH
February 2007

JUN 09, 2007 04:32 PM

hadees said:

dante42 said:
It's things like this that make me wonder why our country's veto power is in the hands of one person, instead of a group.



It is in the hands of a group. Congress can override Presidential vetos.



Sorry, yes, you are correct.

I'm mainly just upset that it most likely won't be overturned. And it's going to be veto'd due to our country having a president with, in my not remotely humble opinion, a dangerous, antiquated, and ignorant world view.
/rant

abracadabra

abracadabra

Seattle, WA
April 2004

JUN 09, 2007 05:49 PM

So he doesn't support using discarded embryos for scientific research , yet supports the war (needless death of soldiers)..Now i understand

Necia

Necia

Salt Lake City, UT
August 2005

JUN 09, 2007 06:09 PM

abracadabra said:
So he doesn't support using discarded embryos for scientific research , yet supports the war (needless death of soldiers)..Now i understand



Well, yeah. I mean, once you're born, who gives a fuck, right?

*sigh*

NickFaust

NickFaust

USA
April 2004

JUN 09, 2007 06:17 PM

DucksAreCrazy

DucksAreCrazy

Lexington, KY
December 2006

JUN 09, 2007 06:37 PM


there's an enormous, stubborn, half-retarded ogre guarding the bridge


Only half?

Vivid

Vivid

SUICIDEGIRL

Michigan, USA

JUN 09, 2007 06:41 PM

arg, stop this! My father needs those stems.

yellowkid

yellowkid

Boise, ID
May 2007

JUN 09, 2007 06:42 PM

A human embryo used in stem cell research is 3-5 days old and is sphere of about 150 cells. For comparison a fly's brain is composed of about 10,000 cells. We have no reason to believe that the blasticyst is capable of feeling pain and is certainly not more important than possibly curing dozens of diseases.

Honorless1

Honorless1

Denver, CO
November 2006

JUN 09, 2007 06:53 PM

This is infuriating. I have a genetic disorder/learning disability called galactosemia, which could very well spell the end for me; people like me (or gramps with Alzheimer's, or the billions of people worldwide with autism, etc, etc.) are getting fucked over by some archaic, anachronistic system of "morality" or "ethics" that Bush deems is greater than the tangible, real problems people like me contend with. Bullshit.

Wren

Wren

SUICIDEGIRL

Minnesota, USA

JUN 09, 2007 07:39 PM

Praise the Lord! Now those cells can go in the garbage instead!

TeeMan

TeeMan

Australia
June 2006

JUN 09, 2007 07:44 PM

Its not ok to "kill" embryos that arent even human, but its super-good to invade and decimate another nations population?

Freakn logic dude, out the bloody window.

semyaza

semyaza

Wildomar, CA
December 2004

JUN 09, 2007 08:10 PM

I could use stem cell therapy myself and have no moral issue with using said cells. I just don't like the idea of forcing someone to pay for it if their "morality" says it's a bad thing.

Wren

Wren

SUICIDEGIRL

Minnesota, USA

JUN 09, 2007 08:34 PM

Aren't ANY of you relieved that the cells are going into the garbage?! You are all going to HELL.

SynDigiTal

SynDigiTal

Cleveland, OH
April 2007

JUN 09, 2007 10:23 PM

/sleep

BAN

BAN

Ione, WA
April 2005

JUN 09, 2007 10:44 PM

I heard they got the skin cells of mice to preform like stem cells. Hopefully this will soon end the controversy for both sides.

Postblank

Postblank

New Brunswick, NJ
June 2004

JUN 09, 2007 10:52 PM

Wren said:
Aren't ANY of you relieved that the cells are going into the garbage?! You are all going to HELL.



As an heir to the Hefty bag fortune, I for one applaud throwing stem cells in the circular file.

Throw 'em out 'til the Jesuses come home.

ron

ron

United Kingdom
February 2003

JUN 10, 2007 12:07 AM

Just think how good this is for scientists in other countries, now that you've got a President who can put the brake on US research, and start reversing your technical and economic advances. Let some other country take over world leadership in biological research - make the world a more equal place.

Trahern

Trahern

United Kingdom
March 2003

JUN 10, 2007 04:35 AM

I support stem cell research, but only as a byproduct of my support for killing babies. (First shirt I got from T-shirt Hell that really made sense to me.)

It can be argued that a fetus is human from the moment of conception. I tend to agree with this because they are, after all, human cells. Human being and human becoming are two different things, though. A lot of people see this bill being passed as the start of a slippery slope. Time limits on abortion, euthanasia etc. could all follow.

I figure this kind of thing is only a possibility because of the way law works, and that if people would merely be sensible about the whole thing they'd know where the stem cell issue ends and the other stuff begins.

NickFaust

NickFaust

USA
April 2004

JUN 10, 2007 05:51 AM

Trahern said:
I support stem cell research, but only as a byproduct of my support for killing babies. (First shirt I got from T-shirt Hell that really made sense to me.)

It can be argued that a fetus is human from the moment of conception. I tend to agree with this because they are, after all, human cells. Human being and human becoming are two different things, though. A lot of people see this bill being passed as the start of a slippery slope. Time limits on abortion, euthanasia etc. could all follow.

I figure this kind of thing is only a possibility because of the way law works, and that if people would merely be sensible about the whole thing they'd know where the stem cell issue ends and the other stuff begins.



Cool. So let's save all those embryos (oops, sorry, cellular humans) and raise them till they are 18 and of age to join the military.

Then we can kill them.

Look, the issue here is that either way these cells are going to bite the dust. They can be destroyed or they can be used to help an actual living breathing human being (as opposed to a fluffy ball of cells that someday, if it survives the womb and the birthing process, become a human being.)

The idea that human life begins as conception is religious doctrine. It has no place in our laws.

Ff

Ff

I'm lost
August 2006

JUN 10, 2007 06:10 AM

NickFaust said:
The idea that human life begins as conception is religious doctrine. It has no place in our laws.



can you elaborate on this?

what is the first stage in human development if not conception?

scottishrob

scottishrob

Olathe, KS
July 2003

JUN 10, 2007 06:32 AM

I'm not as up on both sides of this debate as I'd like to be. WIth that said something kinda confused me from the article.

"If this bill were to become law, American taxpayers would for the first time in our history be compelled to support the deliberate destruction of human embryos"

Correct me if I'm wrong but is this saying that he isn't supporting it because it will make the research federally funded. That says nothing about private organizations. So does it make the research legal just not state funded? If that is the case can't people who support the research do so by donation and those who don't aren't affected?


Oh an sorry for any spelling or grammer errors, I'm already running late for work.

fountainofdreams

fountainofdreams

Mokena, IL
January 2005

JUN 10, 2007 08:47 AM

fuckfuck said:

NickFaust said:
The idea that human life begins as conception is religious doctrine. It has no place in our laws.



can you elaborate on this?

what is the first stage in human development if not conception?



I think what he's saying is that to the Pro-life crowd, conception is considered to have created a human right there, without any other development. At conception, the "human" is 2 cells combined, which multiplies; not exactly a living, breathing human.

Trahern

Trahern

United Kingdom
March 2003

JUN 10, 2007 01:28 PM

Not that religious doctrine is always a bad thing, but that was the point of my 'human being vs human becoming' comment. I called the fetus human, not human *being.* It's human genetic material that could become a person. Maybe using the phrase 'potential human' would have been clearer, I think that's the one pro-lifers use.

But yeah, if it's going to be junked anyway, may as well do something useful with it. For me it's in the same book as organ donation.

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2

Next