NEWS: Bush to Abort Stem Cell Bill, Again

POLITICS: Bush to Abort Stem Cell Bill, Again

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:

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.

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

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*

590 DAYS 2 Hrs 39 Min 44.1 Sec

http://www.backwardsbush.com/includes/publicClock.php

Only half?

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.

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.

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.

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.

/sleep

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

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.

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.

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.

can you elaborate on this?

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

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.

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.

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.