Once again Bush does his best to set us way back...

[Tyler's Dad]

There is no federal ban on stem cell research. The Fed DOES fund research on existing lines. I back this President on this and I will oppose the new president if they allow this to be funded.

No one (on this thread) has called anyone "Unpartriotic" for their stance on this, so stop with the nonsense. And if you believe in this so much, no one is stopping you from dontating to *ongoing* research.

I do donate to this cause and will continue to. The problem is the research needs more funding. They need new lines opened up and they need more support from the government. Instead, the president has blocked this and the message and picture that the administration is giving the public is of women being forced into abortions to give their embryos to research.

 

[Tyler's Dad]

There is no federal ban on stem cell research. The Fed DOES fund research on existing lines. I back this President on this and I will oppose the new president if they allow this to be funded.
No one (on this thread) has called anyone "Unpartriotic" for their stance on this, so stop with the nonsense. And if you believe in this so much, no one is stopping you from dontating to *ongoing* research.

By the way, if you admit you don't know anything about this, then why are you against the funding? Wouldn't it make more sense for you to research it and formulate your own opinion on it?

 

[jimmiej]

It almost makes you wish for a good ole assasination...

Mikeeee

I can't believe you said that! You should be ashamed of yourself!

 

[KariC]

Same old Republican jargon. We are going to deny the masses from what they want and if they complain, we will either say they are unpatriotic for questioning us, or they can fund it themselves if they want it so bad.

The truth is nobody knows how much could be found within embryonic cells, since funding has been kept from the research from day 1. Yes some states and private organizations fund some research but it takes way more money and the access to more of the embryos that are discarded right now in order to have real breakthroughs. You will see a lot more progress made in this field sometime in 2009, after a pro research administration is in place and the funding is made available. BTW, this doesn't neccessarily mean a Dem as President either. McCain and Gulianni are for this research.

What do you mean by "access to more of the embryos"? I'm curious because these embryos languishing at fertility clinics are not available for research unless the parents donate them for such use. (see previous post of mine) These embryos belong to a couple (and believe me, you sign a huge amount of legal paperwork indicating such....), and they are not just "available" for research. In fact, I think Rand Corp (or someone) did a survey and found that LESS THAN 2% of embryos in storage at fertility clinics in the US would be donated to embryonic stem cell research. The other 98% are for the use of the couple to have a family, or to be adopted out to other couples trying to have a family through "snowflake adoptions".

Or, do you mean access to more embryos in that we would create embryos in order to destroy them for their stem cells? That we would pay women to donate eggs (through a very intensive medical procedure that does indeed have future health implications, and can cost several thousands of dollars in drugs and doctor's appts to ensure the safety of the woman) and pay men to donate sperm (a much easier process, that does not involve daily injecting hormones and close monitering by a Reproductive Endocrinologist) to create an embryo (splitting cells and all) for research?

Just curious......

 

[punkin]

By the way, if you admit you don't know anything about this, then why are you against the funding? Wouldn't it make more sense for you to research it and formulate your own opinion on it?

But Bush said it's wrong and we never disagree with Bush.

 

[Charade]

By the way, if you admit you don't know anything about this, then why are you against the funding? Wouldn't it make more sense for you to research it and formulate your own opinion on it?

I didn't say I knew nothing, I said I know little. Do you think if I researched it more, it would change my opinion of not wanting my tax dollars funding this? I'm against abortion. So why wouldn't I be against something that also destroys potential human life? I'd be called a hypocrite if I approved of one and not the other.

 

[Charade]

But Bush said it's wrong and we never disagree with Bush.

Ah yes, the same ol' lame ol' argument that people who agree with Bush (on some things, I completely disagree with his immigration policy) are mindless lemming nonthinkers.

Please...

 

[Charade]

But Bush said it's wrong and we never disagree with Bush.

I find it interesting how liberals will so often belittle the people they disagree with. It's a toss up whether that comes before or after the name calling.

 

[Tyler's Dad]

I didn't say I knew nothing, I said I know little. Do you think if I researched it more, it would change my opinion of not wanting my tax dollars funding this? I'm against abortion. So why wouldn't I be against something that also destroys potential human life? I'd be called a hypocrite if I approved of one and not the other.

You are showing your lack of knowledge with this answer. This bill had NOTHING to do with destroying potential life. This only allowed for us to use embryos no matter when they were produced. Bush initially allowed for research on 77 lines of embryonic cells and ONLY those 77 lines. Of them, only 21 have proven to be useful due to lab problems at the facilities or contaminated embryos. This bill would have allowed the opening of more lines. All it would have done is given access to government backed programs to the embryos from the fertility clinics throughout the United States. In these cases it only would have been in the clinic donated the embryos at the permission of the parents. Now, how is this destroying potential life? It is only using what will be discarded or given to private studies instead.

 

[eclectics]

I didn't say I knew nothing, I said I know little. Do you think if I researched it more, it would change my opinion of not wanting my tax dollars funding this? I'm against abortion. So why wouldn't I be against something that also destroys potential human life? I'd be called a hypocrite if I approved of one and not the other.

Then I assume you have equal outrage for the fertility clinics that discard unused embryos? Funny, you never hear much more than an occasional whimper coming from the RTL folks about that.

 

[Tyler's Dad]

What do you mean by "access to more of the embryos"? I'm curious because these embryos languishing at fertility clinics are not available for research unless the parents donate them for such use. (see previous post of mine) These embryos belong to a couple (and believe me, you sign a huge amount of legal paperwork indicating such....), and they are not just "available" for research. In fact, I think Rand Corp (or someone) did a survey and found that LESS THAN 2% of embryos in storage at fertility clinics in the US would be donated to embryonic stem cell research. The other 98% are for the use of the couple to have a family, or to be adopted out to other couples trying to have a family through "snowflake adoptions".

Or, do you mean access to more embryos in that we would create embryos in order to destroy them for their stem cells? That we would pay women to donate eggs (through a very intensive medical procedure that does indeed have future health implications, and can cost several thousands of dollars in drugs and doctor's appts to ensure the safety of the woman) and pay men to donate sperm (a much easier process, that does not involve daily injecting hormones and close monitering by a Reproductive Endocrinologist) to create an embryo (splitting cells and all) for research?

Just curious......

None of what was being passed would have changed this. It would have just given the federally funded research studies access to these donated embryos. This is what I mean by more embryos. Sorry for the confusion.

 

[KariC]

None of what was being passed would have changed this. It would have just given the federally funded research studies access to these donated embryos. This is what I mean by more embryos. Sorry for the confusion.

No big deal (not really confused). What about the 2% I mentioned? There are not that many of these embryos out there that are not intended on being used. That 2% are often donated to research where they can (and are) being used. Most of the ones that are "discarded" by the clinics would not be usable (their cells are not splitting normally, they did not survive being thawed, etc., and would have ended most likely in a miscarriage if used by the parents), so it would be futile to send them to labs.

 

[RickinNYC]

It almost makes you wish for a good ole assasination...

Mikeeee

Is the above comment illegal? I think it's illegal.

Anyway, this just supports my belief that Busch is just a complete and total, despicable moron and a sorry excuse for a human being.

 

[KariC]

But Bush said it's wrong and we never disagree with Bush.

Hmm...since I am a thinking, reading, researching adult.....I believe I can agree with our President on a topic (or more), and disagree with him on several others. I don't think that is mutually exclusive.

 

[Charade]

Stem cell study

Sixty percent of patients who have undergone in vitro fertilization said they would like to donate unused embryos to stem cell research, according to a study published today in the online edition of the journal Science.

The study, led by researchers at Duke University and Johns Hopkins University, surveyed thousands of men and women who had gone through fertility treatment.

When asked to choose between destroying unused embryos, donating them to infertile couples or donating them to science, 49 percent of patients said they preferred the latter. That number jumped to 60 percent when asked whether they favored using the embryos for stem cell research in particular.

On average, each of the 2,120 patients surveyed had between four and six unused embryos. The study was conducted at nine fertility centers across the country.


"Destroying human life in the hopes of saving human life is not ethical, and it is not the only option before us," said Bush, who appeared onstage with Kaitlyne McNamara of Middletown, Conn., who was born with spina bifida and is benefiting from what Bush called "ethical stem cell research."

Even some people with conditions that might benefit from ESCR are opposed to it.

 

[Disneyland1084]

 

[Charade]

Hmm...since I am a thinking, reading, researching adult.....I believe I can agree with our President on a topic (or more), and disagree with him on several others. I don't think that is mutually exclusive.

Obviously you're an anomaly.

 

[lovemygoofy]

Offtopic please excuse me,

It's too bad you have nothing productive to add to this topic. I don't understand why you feel the need to add to ever topic your popcorn man other than you know that it irritates people. When you start a topic, do you not feel the need of equal respect for replies and conversation regarding the topic you have started instead of useless nothing? The next time you feel the need to add the popcorn man to a conversation, try to refrain because it's neither cute nor funny. Thank you kindly in advance.


Go on about your business now, Sorry for the interuption

 

[transparant]

Vice President Dick Cheney. Just wanted to make that correction. Carry on.

 

[RickinNYC]

Vice President Dick Cheney. Just wanted to make that correction. Carry on.

Yeesh, you say it like that and it still makes me shudder.

BBBRRRRRRRRrrrrrrrr.....