Comments on: Stem Cell Showdown: The Facts Have Changed, President Bush Has Not

By: rebutal time

rebutal time — Tue, 13 Feb 2007 19:33:46 +0000

potnent’

and embryos have the “potential” to become living beings. Something to ponder on…

By: rebutal time

rebutal time — Tue, 13 Feb 2007 19:32:22 +0000

Gunny Mills, your reasoning is terribly wrong. It is hypothetical because the upper officials will not allow stem cell research to become a reality therefore it is going to be hypothetical…And yes you can extract stem cells from living beings, but those cells are not as poten and adaptable as the cells from the embryos- younger cells can reproduce faster etc etc..

By: gunny mills

gunny mills — Mon, 05 Feb 2007 21:55:28 +0000

there is no published scientific effidence that i single person would or could be saved via stem cell research it is all just hypothetic, oh and by the way you can extract stem cells from a living being so why all the push to use aborted (murdered) babies. hmmm makes you wonder the real objective

By: felix hatley

felix hatley — Sun, 26 Nov 2006 02:21:01 +0000

Every person on this forum is a blind fool, and I can’t believe the lack of intelligence displayed here, based and lead by fools like Al Franken; fools in your folly, stay where you all are; the blind know well how to lead the blind!

By: Will

Will — Tue, 18 Jul 2006 17:37:30 +0000

Embryos are not beings. The have no hearts, no brains, no feelings, no thougths, no emotions. On the other hand, cows and pigs, raised for food under cruel conditions and then slaughtered, are unquestionably sentient beings with all these qualities.

Mind you, I’m not a vegetarian, but we all need to keep the so-called ethical dilema of embryo destruction in perspective. I don’t see how anyone could rationally argue that destroying an embryo presents as much of an ethical challenge of eating a piece of bacon or a hamburger.

By: Bob Satan

Bob Satan — Tue, 18 Jul 2006 05:01:17 +0000

Today Bush released a statement explaining why he will veto H.R. 810

Why does the media even repeat this obvious lie. Bush has threatened to veto many times and never has.

I wager he won’t veto it.

By: AvengingAngel

AvengingAngel — Tue, 18 Jul 2006 04:24:24 +0000

In an interview with the Denver Post editorial board, Karl Rove signaled that President Bush would use the first veto of his presidency to block Congressional stem cell legislation. For Democrats, that veto threat could be just what the doctor ordered.

In a nutshell, Bush’s 2006 base-baiting, red meat strategy could well backfire when it comes to stem cell research.

For the details, see:
“Bush Stem Cell Veto Threat is Dems’ Opportunity”

By: Mr. Evil

Mr. Evil — Tue, 18 Jul 2006 04:15:25 +0000

I’m so pissed off right now I forgot to add the part about the destruction of human life in Iraq of which a great many are Americans. What about the destruction of human life elsewhere in the middle east right now. Arrogant, out-of-touch, sactimonious boob and only half a man.

By: jason

jason — Tue, 18 Jul 2006 03:53:51 +0000

I agree with you totally Marie. I also take umbrage with Randy’s “I believe….”
He is free to believe what he wants – the problem is he and those of his ilk (fundamentalist of
all stripes) have no problem trying to shove it down our throats. If you do not believe in the promise of stem cell research, then when an actual cure comes along – like diabetes – then Randy just step aside. THAT is how you honer YOUR beliefs without stepping on mine.

By: Marie

Marie — Tue, 18 Jul 2006 02:59:18 +0000

Randy, I don’t want my tax dollars funding the killing of innocent civilians in this illegal war. So is this a stand off?
We all have things we don’t approve being funded with our tax dollars.
Not funding embryonic stem cell research is a false argument, considering that the opposers of the research don’t have qualms about sending perfectly healthy living beings to die in an unwarranted and immoral war as opposed to research on pre-human life cells being used to help fully developed, yet afflicted, live human beings.

By: TripMaster Monkey

TripMaster Monkey — Tue, 18 Jul 2006 02:58:30 +0000

- Mad as hell:

If we impeach Bush, we impeach the whole lot. Clean house.

By: Marie

Marie — Tue, 18 Jul 2006 02:54:54 +0000

#10, trueblue
I can’t find proof that the Bush twins are products of in vitro. Do you know?
What a story that would make if it could be proven!

By: Mad as hell

Mad as hell — Tue, 18 Jul 2006 02:39:44 +0000

I haven’t supported impeachment of Bush, as the next guy in line is “lethal”. If Bush vetos the Stem Cell Bill, I say we impeach immediately. He is worthless to anyone. This could be the only contribution he makes during the 8 miserable years he’s been president, and he’s such a failure, he’ll blow this one too! This is the most incompetent, irresponsible and reprehensible administration of all time. It’s a complete debacle!

By: katy

katy — Tue, 18 Jul 2006 02:15:54 +0000

i received an email fro MegaVote… below is part of it:

Upcoming Votes

Fetus Farming Prohibition Act of 2006 – S.3504
During a week of debate on several stem cell bills, the Senate will consider this bill that would prohibit the practice of deliberately initiating a human pregnancy to obtain fetal cells or tissues.

Alternative Pluripotent Stem Cell Therapies Enhancement Act – S.2754
This bill would promote research into stem cells that are not derived from fetuses.

Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act – H.R.810
The Senate is scheduled to take up this House bill that would require the Department of Health and Human Services to support and promote research on human embryonic stem cells.

By: antiwarMan

antiwarMan — Tue, 18 Jul 2006 01:55:16 +0000

Randy has a problem funding stem cell research with his tax money – but no problem
funding this http://users.fmg.uva.nl/rsetoe/history/war_pictures/13_iran_iraq_war.jpg

warning for the squeemish – mostly those who see a difference between an actual
human and a glob of “potential”

By: JPark

JPark — Tue, 18 Jul 2006 01:27:53 +0000

#Opie, I have not thought about that but I don’t see a law as being necessary considering the stem cells come from either aborted fetuses or (the majority) coming from fertility clinics. I think you have been paid to bring up an issue that does not exist. Oh, and by the way, those who were never born don’t really give a shit.

By: Randy

Randy — Tue, 18 Jul 2006 01:27:51 +0000

I believe this issue really does not focus on stem cell research but the issue of abortion. There are plenty of other sources of viable stem cells besides embromic cellls. Actually, those stem cells from umbillical cords haved actually proved to be better for research. If private companies want to use embromic cells in their research why don’t they? No one is stopping them. They already know what I know. I just don’t want my tax dollars funding the killing of embreos. No, the real issue here folks is with concept of when life begins. I believe it begins at conception and if any of you believed that as well you would understand that you are destroying life when you do this research. I guess I’ll never understand why liberals are so fast to approve of abortions yet when our soldiers are killed in the line of duty spreading freedom and democracy around the world respond with protests.

By: Opie

Opie — Tue, 18 Jul 2006 01:19:02 +0000

Stem cells research should be allowed, but to prevent black market and “sale” of embryos there should be a criminal code which states that selling embreyos or creating them for the purpose of sale, or in any way profiting from the embryos “donation” should be punishible by death or life sentences (as each states law would permit)

Because while i agree there are way to many positives in this research, the fact that people will eventually SELL THE LIFE OF THEIR UNBORN CHILD sickens me beyond anything else.

And if you disagree with me, think about it. You were never born, none of the things you have accomplished happened, you never went to the prom, you never had your true love, your job, ANYTHING. ITS ALL GONE. YOU DO NOT EXIST.
And for what? so some rich old man can live another few years? (im talking about the sale, which, yes, would mostly result in rich old/infirm people getting them for life extension etc)

By: JPark

JPark — Tue, 18 Jul 2006 00:07:56 +0000

#8 Haven’t you seen the trend by Boy George on issues like these? He vows to veto this to pander to his wacky religious fanatics. (Flash to the Senate floor). Wow, the bill passed 70-30. Bush: I did my best but there is no point to vetoing since the votes are there to override. The smirky little bastard placates the nuts and doesn’t have to take a stand against a widely popular position.

By: sluggo

sluggo — Tue, 18 Jul 2006 00:05:45 +0000

The issue comes down to values. Arguing that 70% of the population support a policy does not work because if it is a question of values then individual rights must take priority. If 70% of the population voted to bring back slavery it would not be right.

This refusal by Bush to sign the bill clearly shows his values (or at least the values he is prepared to publically support so he can keep the money coming from the Born-again Talaban in this country). Bush values 100 cell “people” over real people. Bush is basically saying that he does not care about future suffering of people, but cares more about his 100 cell “people”.

However, his actions to propose and support laws to make “killing” these 100 cell “people” is less than concrete. Are there laws that make disposing of excess 100 cell “people” a criminal act?

Either Bush really believes his values (in which case we have a lunatic in charge of this country) or he is cynical enough to pretend to believe in order to keep the support of the Born-again Talaban group (in which case we have an unethical crook running the country).

What a choice.