skins Posted July 19, 2006 Share Posted July 19, 2006 In a secret ceremony. Guess what? It wasnt a spending bill. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonorator Posted July 19, 2006 Share Posted July 19, 2006 he did it because he loves babies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
untateve Posted July 19, 2006 Share Posted July 19, 2006 It was my understanding that the stem cells were to be collected from embryos already created, provided that the "parents" permitted this. If not, they are to be thrown away. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiegie Posted July 19, 2006 Share Posted July 19, 2006 It was my understanding that stem cell research can already be conducted in the US on discarded embryos, only such research cannot receive government funding. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squeegiebo Posted July 19, 2006 Share Posted July 19, 2006 "This bill would support the taking of innocent human life of the hope of finding medical benefits for others," the president said. Give me a f*cking break. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted July 20, 2006 Share Posted July 20, 2006 It was my understanding that stem cell research can already be conducted in the US on discarded embryos, only such research cannot receive government funding. You are corrrect. Nobody is saying stem cell research can't go forward. It just won't go forward on the tax payers bill. I like this veto, because contrary to what skinsy said, it is a veto on a spending bill. Thanks to the veto we will not be spending tax dollars for this type of research. I like this veto on two fronts. 1. It is likely to prevent additional federal spending and 2, It does not allow the government to fund something that I find ethically and morally questionable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furd Posted July 20, 2006 Share Posted July 20, 2006 Bush couldn't spell veto if you spotted him the V and the T. Uh . . . V, ......E, ......E doh sh*t uh, I got it now . . . V, ..... E, ....T, ......O E VETOE Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skins Posted July 20, 2006 Author Share Posted July 20, 2006 (edited) You are corrrect. Nobody is saying stem cell research can't go forward. It just won't go forward on the tax payers bill. I like this veto, because contrary to what skinsy said, it is a veto on a spending bill. Thanks to the veto we will not be spending tax dollars for this type of research. I like this veto on two fronts. 1. It is likely to prevent additional federal spending and 2, It does not allow the government to fund something that I find ethically and morally questionable. A great deal of significant scientific R & D is government funded and subsidized and this means that the US will fall farther and farther behind the international community and lose potentially incredible opportunities. Yer position, and that of Bush, are typical anti-science Republican positions and noone should be surprised by that. But spinning it as a spending cut is really a gutsy piece of bullAthena and you are to be applauded. And why exactly do you find expanding the stem cell lines morally and ethically questionable? I am curious. Edited July 20, 2006 by skins Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squeegiebo Posted July 20, 2006 Share Posted July 20, 2006 I don't have time to read this stuff. Does this mean that no federally-funded entity can do stem cell research (e.g., universities)? If not, what does it mean. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted July 20, 2006 Share Posted July 20, 2006 A great deal of significant scientific R & D is government funded and subsidized and this means that the US will fall farther and farther behind the international community and lose potentially incredible opportunities. Yer position, and that of Bush, are typical anti-science Republican positions and noone should be surprised by that. But spinning it as a spending cut is really a gutsy piece of bullAthena and you are to be applauded. And why exactly do you find expanding the stem cell lines morally and ethically questionable? I am curious. Which of these items were invented with the help of government aided research: steam boat, light bulb, telephone, cotton gin, automobile, plane, combustion engine, crane, dam, etc... If the need is great enough, and their is a solution, then privately funded research will find the solution. From a moral and ethical standpoint, I have no problem with adult stem cell research, if you want to donate your's for this great new fronteer in science, I strongly suggest that you do so. I have no problem with imbilical cord stem cell research. I do have a problem with embrionic stem cell research, and it is the same problem I have with abortion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squeegiebo Posted July 20, 2006 Share Posted July 20, 2006 I do have a problem with embrionic stem cell research, and it is the same problem I have with abortion. Do you have a problem with an embryo being discarded if not used? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted July 20, 2006 Share Posted July 20, 2006 Do you have a problem with an embryo being discarded if not used? I have a problem with making and banking embrios. And yes, I have a problem with them being discarded. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squeegiebo Posted July 20, 2006 Share Posted July 20, 2006 I have a problem with making and banking embrios. And yes, I have a problem with them being discarded. Is this based on the "life begins at conception" thing? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted July 20, 2006 Share Posted July 20, 2006 Is this based on the "life begins at conception" thing? Yes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChuckB Posted July 20, 2006 Share Posted July 20, 2006 Chuck Norris was discarded as an embryo, only to drag himself out of the trash and continue to grow without any outside help. After he matured he killed all involved in his discarding and went on to have an illustrious Hollywood career. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaP'N GRuNGe Posted July 20, 2006 Share Posted July 20, 2006 Chuck Norris was discarded as an embryo, only to drag himself out of the trash and continue to grow without any outside help. After he matured he killed all involved in his discarding and went on to have an illustrious Hollywood career. Well done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted July 20, 2006 Share Posted July 20, 2006 Which of these items were invented with the help of government aided research: Hydro Power Dams that were a major factor in winning WW2? Without that we couldn't have spoiled silver spoon rich kids speaking english that inherited their daddy's business whining about taxes and pretending to escape to a moral high ground when it comes to researching cells from a refrigerator. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WaterMan Posted July 20, 2006 Share Posted July 20, 2006 China could privately fund our scientists. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yukon Cornelius Posted July 20, 2006 Share Posted July 20, 2006 It was my understanding that the stem cells were to be collected from embryos already created, provided that the "parents" permitted this. If not, they are to be thrown away. yup Is this based on the "life begins at conception" thing? yes Why would private( money making) medical firms want to do away with some or all diseases?? Just think of the money that could be made on polio if they hadn't gotten ride of that Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexgaddis Posted July 20, 2006 Share Posted July 20, 2006 I thought Tedy Bruschi already cured most diseases? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiegie Posted July 20, 2006 Share Posted July 20, 2006 (edited) Why would private( money making) medical firms want to do away with some or all diseases?? Just think of the money that could be made on polio if they hadn't gotten ride of that Assuming that this is not a joke, who cares if existing companies in the medical industry would prefer that diseases not go away. The beauty of free markets is that some new upstart firm can come in and make a ton of money by figuring out a way to prevent diseases. And knowing this, the existing firms will have an incentive to conduct the research themselves. (Or, thinking of the theme of the new book Saving Capitalism from the Capitalists by two University of Chicago econ profs, the existing firms will have an incentive to petition the government to stop this new line of research from being conducted. For you conspiracy theorists, it would be interesting to look to see if pharmaceutical firms are giving money to politicians who oppose using federal money for stem-cell research.) Edited July 20, 2006 by wiegie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hepcat71 Posted July 20, 2006 Share Posted July 20, 2006 What really pisses me off is Bush, et. al., care more about a bunch of unwanted embryo-sicles than the health and welfare of all humanity. Personally, this research could lead to cures of both curses on my life - leukemia and spinal cord injury. It might well not help me, but at least it could help millions of poor bastages in the future. Of course, none of this matters .... kissing up to the hardcore Christicans, before the mid-term elections is what really counts. Idiots. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yukon Cornelius Posted July 20, 2006 Share Posted July 20, 2006 So the party of life is in a quandary... save lives for everyone or save lives for a few with money..... hmmmmmmmmm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimC Posted July 20, 2006 Share Posted July 20, 2006 Good grief...we can't afford the old people we got now and you people want to find ways to help them live to be even older? Install the red blinking lights in everyone's palm and save America. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted July 20, 2006 Share Posted July 20, 2006 What really pisses me off is Bush, et. al., care more about a bunch of unwanted embryo-sicles than the health and welfare of all humanity. Personally, this research could lead to cures of both curses on my life - leukemia and spinal cord injury. It might well not help me, but at least it could help millions of poor bastages in the future. Of course, none of this matters .... kissing up to the hardcore Christicans, before the mid-term elections is what really counts. Idiots. Well, your quality of life (and many others) may suffer due to Bush's political cat and mouse game, but at least you can rest well knowing we aren't morally offending hardcore right wing pseudo-Christian extremists. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.