Headline: Bush Embraces Death

A Veto Kills thousands

from JoeUser Forums
In a move that stuns me and makes me actually believe just a little in politicians the government of the United States actually overruled Bushes idiotic stem cell research law.

Amazing. Fantastic. Wonderful.

In other news: Bush vows to veto bill.

*sigh* So much for that little belief in politicians to actually do something useful.

W. has the same bogus, life hating view that comes from all religions, but most specifically Christianity. He is putting what might be ahead of what IS. To put this simply:

Michael J. Fox is dying of Parkinson’s Disease. If this bill does not pass he almost certainly will die. And millions of people world wide that are closer to death than Fox WILL die. That’s called money in the bank. Absolute, certain death. (unless of course more enlightened nations save the day with research that the United States should be doing, but of course only idiots wait for someone else to take care of their problems for them… oh ya, that’s called socialism)

But in some mind numbing warped way, Bush sees his position as defending life. He’s defending 100 cells created in a test tube for the sole purpose of being used in experiments in the same way that we culture bacteria or viruses for study. If the research wasn’t being done, the egg would never be fertilized. And it certainly will never be implanted in a woman to be gestated no matter what. We’re not talking about taking aborted foetuses (although it’s the same difference), we’re talking about taking a single cell from a woman that wilfully gives it up, bombarding it in a Petri dish with millions of cells from a man that willingly gave them up (and probably had a good time in the processes) and then letting it grow for a few days and then experimenting on them. This is not a human. And even if there was any possibility that it would become a human, that’s a POSSIBILITY. It’s possible that those cells might become a human being and live. But Alex P. Keaton is ABSOLUTELY going to die if this research doesn’t happen.

For all of you Christians out there that think you’re defending life with this inane policy of favouring what might be over what is, think carefully the next time you say goodbye to someone with MS, or Parkinson’s or Alzimers or the next time you see someone in a wheel chair or the next time you watch Superman and realize that your policies condemned Christopher Reeves to years in bed unable to move and then eventually his death.

You and people like you killed him, and are committing murder against Michael J. Fox and those that suffer similar ailments. No might be, or possibly preventing a life from happening that would never have happened anyhow, you’re killing real live people. You’re doing it wilfully, cognitively, and with complete forethought and knowledge of the consequences of your actions. That’s 1st degree murder. And the Bible says you should be put to death for it.

Now there’s a contradiction for you.

Embrace life. Real, living human beings that can look you in the eye when their bodies aren’t shaking themselves to pieces, and are pleading with you to just allow scientists to do their jobs and pursue medicines that will allow them to continue to live. Anything else is not only immoral, it’s evil.
12,219 views 22 replies
Reply #1 from JoeUser Forums Top

Galt,

OK, you threw me a curveball here. Please help me understand this, as my understanding is that part of the issue here is FEDERAL FUNDING.

As a conservative Christian who is also a Libertarian, I personally support stem cell research, even when the source is an aborted fetus. While I abhor abortion, I do support a woman's right to choose, and would rather that any potential scientific gains NOT be wasted.

But I do not support ANY of the above with federal funding. That, in my mind, is the most key part of the issue here. If we want this research, let the money be raised privately, NOT through confiscatory taxes. (This, by the way is the primary area of confusion; I know you to be a fellow Libertarian, heck, your name betrays it if nothing else).

Am I wrong here? Are there no federal funds involved? If I'm wrong, please correct me.

Reply #2 from JoeUser Forums Top
If you embrace life, you must reject embryonic stem cell research as it destroys life.

Who decides if your life is more impornat than John Doe's? You? Someone died and made you GOD?
Galactic Civilizations III
Reply #3 from JoeUser Forums Top
"Michael J. Fox is dying of Parkinson’s Disease. If this bill does not pass he almost certainly will die."


You accuse Bush of leaning on what "might be" and then pretend that this law would somehow save Micheal J. Fox... or anyone, for that matter?

Alex P. Keaton is ABSOLUTELY going to die, regardless of how this laws goes, because there is no possible way that any research from this will be put into general use anytime soon. You also neglect to mention that human embryos are only one source for stem cells, and that each of these people you are weepy about has great hope in that research as well.

You state boldly that opposition to human embryo research "condemned Christopher Reeves to years in bed unable to move and then eventually his death." Even you would have to admit that had there been NO interefence that there was no way we could have utilized this research in time to save Christopher Reeve.

Frankly I think you are making a lot more assumptions about the potential of this research than Bush makes about embryos becoming humans. There's no guarentee that anything will come of such research, and it is very, very improbable that anyone suffering now would live the decades it will take to turn it into practical treatments.

People are, however, requesting to adopt these embryos, which do become humans all the time. Nothing iffy about that. This is a very emotional response from the 'objective' Mr, Galt.
Reply #4 from JoeUser Forums Top
As a sufferer of Multiple Sclerosis I take exception to what you say and tell you that "you" need to do some MORE reading on this subject "before" you can comment intelligently on it.
Reply #5 from JoeUser Forums Top
Alex P. Keaton is ABSOLUTELY going to die, regardless of how this laws goes,


Very True. We are all going to die regardless of what happens with the research.

This poster sounds like JOhn Edwards during the last election. Playing God with Politics. Well, they have tried every other trick, I guess it was bound to happen with this one.
Reply #6 from JoeUser Forums Top
Congratulations John, you get the King Doyle Award for ignorance.

First, it has already been pointed out to you that the ban is on funding, not research. Unless you are willing to say that no research can ever exist without the government's backing then you can't possibly believe your own rhetoric here.

Next, even those researching stem cells concede that we won't know what life saving treatments will be available using embryonic stem cells for at least another 10 years or so. So you can take your "death" speak and stuff it into a denucleated stem cell! For all the good embryonic stem cell research does us now, your stuffing your ignorance into them would get the same results.

Guess what, Michael J. Fox is dying of Parkinson's Disease whether Prs. Bush lifts the ban or throws the entire GDP at the problem. All the celebrity status Michael J. Fox can muster won't change that fact. Dropping his name won't do much more than invoke "press=participation". Money (or the lack of) is not killing Michael J. Fox, and your ignorance can't save him. Michael J. Fox is dying because of his own neurological system. If you really want to see a treatment that might be made available in time for him, urge Adult Stem Cell research. There are already treatments using those stem cells, but the political emphasis in on Embryonic stem cells. Guess what, unless Michael J. Fox needs a whole new body, there is nothing Embryonic stem cell research can do for him that Adult Stem cell research can't do, and we're a decade or so closer to treatments.

So leave your religious bigotry at the door and embrace life yourself!!! Quit lashing out against Prs. Bush when all you do is expose your own inability to research a topic before you get on your soapbox.
Reply #7 from JoeUser Forums Top
"First, it has already been pointed out to you that the ban is on funding, not research."

The fact that the ban is on funding is indicative of a particular mindset, regardless that the ban is not on research. And, that is what is so aggravating. And, how long would it take if the neoconservatives have their specific way, will it take for it to be a ban on research, too. That is really what they want, but don't have the brass to do it, for fear of losing even those who are trying desparately to hang onto their support of these small-minded politicians. In fact, most people are against this ban on funding.

"Next, even those researching stem cells concede that we won't know what life saving treatments will be available using embryonic stem cells for at least another 10 years or so."

If ever there is a reason to start the research NOW, this is it. Since when has the timeframe for research been reason to not fund it? Besides, that's not the point. The point is that the potential advances to fight these illnesses is so huge that we have to start the research now, AND THE FUNDING THAT GOES WITH IT, so future generations will be helped.

"So leave your religious bigotry at the door and embrace life yourself!!! Quit lashing out against Prs. Bush when all you do is expose your own inability to research a topic before you get on your soapbox."

Excuse me???? Who's the religious bigot here? Seems those looking to "embrace life" even though those little collection of stem cells would likely be trashed anyway are the bigots. This isn't about life. This is about this foolhardly notion of some religious bigotry that prevents the advances of research to protect their little pulpits.

Personally, I think pres. bush is a puppet at the bottom of the string held and controlled by the religious bigots. He's a fool extraordinaire who is also clueless. But, he doesn't care. He's got power and money and an army to play with. Life is so good for him. He could care less about those for whom life has played those dirty little tricks of illness and poverty. And, he's a bigot of the worst kind because of his megalomania.
Reply #8 from JoeUser Forums Top
The fact that the ban is on funding is indicative of a particular mindset, regardless that the ban is not on research. And, that is what is so aggravating. And, how long would it take if the neoconservatives have their specific way,


What is wrong with your money? is it not as spendable? Give to the research! if that is your mantra, put your money where your mouth is, NOT MINE.

For in my beleifs, what you are proposing is nazish. Killing the weak to save the rest.

So use your own fricking money! Not MINE.
Reply #9 from JoeUser Forums Top
Nail on the head, dr. guy.

I found it ironic that a blogger whose username is taken from Ayn Rand's novels would be pressing for FEDERAL FUNDING for this project with massive pork potential.
Reply #10 from JoeUser Forums Top
Nail on the head, dr. guy.


I am honored! Coming from you, that is high praise. Thank you.
Reply #11 from JoeUser Forums Top

"First, it has already been pointed out to you that the ban is on funding, not research."

The fact that the ban is on funding is indicative of a particular mindset, regardless that the ban is not on research. And, that is what is so aggravating. And, how long would it take if the neoconservatives have their specific way, will it take for it to be a ban on research, too. That is really what they want, but don't have the brass to do it, for fear of losing even those who are trying desparately to hang onto their support of these small-minded politicians. In fact, most people are against this ban on funding.

"Next, even those researching stem cells concede that we won't know what life saving treatments will be available using embryonic stem cells for at least another 10 years or so."

If ever there is a reason to start the research NOW, this is it. Since when has the timeframe for research been reason to not fund it? Besides, that's not the point. The point is that the potential advances to fight these illnesses is so huge that we have to start the research now, AND THE FUNDING THAT GOES WITH IT, so future generations will be helped.


Once again I would suggest a little more research is in order! The federal government has funneled over "350 MILLION USD" into stem cell research! Ther is NO BAN on funding OR research. Only on fed funding of developing new lines of cells! The research is ongoing and will not stop!
Reply #12 from JoeUser Forums Top
"What is wrong with your money? is it not as spendable? Give to the research! if that is your mantra, put your money where your mouth is, NOT MINE."

Well then, this is how I feel about the war in Iraq. I don't want MY money being spent on it. I don't want my money being spent on the "abstinence only" fiasco. I don't want my money being spent on subsidizing new sports stadiums.

Fact is, our money gets spent where our government decides to spend it. Fact is, using a few cells THAT ARE GOING TO BE DESTROYED ANYWAY for research is exactly where our tax dollars should be spent.

".... what you are proposing is nazish."

Interesting that you neoconservatives get so upset when liberals accuse YOU of nazi and fascist tendencies. We're talking about a few cells here. Not a fully realized human being. Oh migod, the hypocrisy is really appauling.

"I found it ironic that a blogger whose username is taken from Ayn Rand's novels would be pressing for FEDERAL FUNDING for this project with massive pork potential."

What Ayn Rand novel? I'm not familiar with this reference.
Reply #13 from JoeUser Forums Top
"Ther is NO BAN on funding OR research. Only on fed funding of developing new lines of cells! The research is ongoing and will not stop!"

I think I remember you stating in other places that the guv has not banned research, but only funding. You talking, I believe. Fact is, our pres is trying all he can to stop the funding, which is where the problem is here. And, according to what I've read and heard, though I have no references yet, scientists are complaining that the existing lines are contaminated with mouse proteins anyway. They need new lines. And, you're right - research is going on. Hell, South Korea is developing the research in leaps and bounds. The US is getting left in the dust, because the funding is not being appropriated by the federal government.

Besides, there is absolutely nothing drmiler says that holds any modicum of credibility, as far as I am concerned. I'll check out my sources, and possibly get back on this. Maybe it will be my first article on my blog.
Reply #14 from JoeUser Forums Top

Interesting that you neoconservatives get so upset when liberals accuse YOU of nazi and fascist tendencies. We're talking about a few cells here. Not a fully realized human being. Oh migod, the hypocrisy is really appauling.


Excuse me.....but to whom do those "cells" belong? You? The government? NO again! And yet again the left doesn't get it! There is NO ban on using these cells! Only on the fed funding of it! DO YOUR RESEARCH!!!
Reply #15 from JoeUser Forums Top
OK, you threw me a curveball here. Please help me understand this, as my understanding is that part of the issue here is FEDERAL FUNDING.

As a conservative Christian who is also a Libertarian, I personally support stem cell research, even when the source is an aborted fetus. While I abhor abortion, I do support a woman's right to choose, and would rather that any potential scientific gains NOT be wasted.

But I do not support ANY of the above with federal funding. That, in my mind, is the most key part of the issue here. If we want this research, let the money be raised privately, NOT through confiscatory taxes. (This, by the way is the primary area of confusion; I know you to be a fellow Libertarian, heck, your name betrays it if nothing else).

Am I wrong here? Are there no federal funds involved? If I'm wrong, please correct me.


It may involve federal funding. But just like Marriage, which should have nothing to do with government at all because it's a religious cerimony, nothing more, if you are going to extend the right of mariage to straight people, you must extend it to all people.

In a perfect world, no scientific research would get ANY government funding. It would be driven by need and the willingness to pay for that research.

But of course we don't live in a perfect world. So facing reality, if others are going to get funding, then stem-cell research must get funding as well.

Keep in mind however that Bush is against ANY research into stem-cells and has promised to veto ANY bill on the subject.
Reply #16 from JoeUser Forums Top
If you embrace life, you must reject embryonic stem cell research as it destroys life.

Who decides if your life is more impornat than John Doe's? You? Someone died and made you GOD?

I addressed this in my article. Read it again. Possibity, versus real live people.
Reply #17 from JoeUser Forums Top
You state boldly that opposition to human embryo research "condemned Christopher Reeves to years in bed unable to move and then eventually his death." Even you would have to admit that had there been NO interefence that there was no way we could have utilized this research in time to save Christopher Reeve.

Actually no I wouldn't because they've already injected spinal cords with stem cells and had varying degrees of increased motor control as a result.

And as for MJ Fox? Well he's looking remarkably better than he was 6 months ago. Perhaps it has something to do with that treatment his wife mentioned out of country that he had... Stem cells work. It's proven already, there are real benefits now. (Altzihmer's patients see almost immeidate improvement in cognitive skills for example just with a single injection)

Yes, no research should get funding Dr. Guy and everyone else. But as I said, if one is going to get it, they all must. You don't get to pick and choose and certainly not based on your personal religious beliefs. You're the head of government. You do get to choose where your own money goes. You do not get to choose which group of people get the benefit of the government and who don't unless it's solely on merit. Just like gay marriage, there is no merit involved in W's veto.

In an objectivist world you would get to choose where each and every dime of your money goes. The only money you'd ever have to spend is for the military/police because they protect you and enable you to live free and accomplish your own goals in life. (and even then I'd argue that you could choose not to have the protection of the police if you wanted) But unfortunately, we don't live in that world. So in reality we deal with what is. What is, is that research gets federal funding just like the oil and coal companies get subsideies to ensure that they're power stations are cheaper than solar and wind power. And if research is going to get funding, then you can't say "stem cell research cannot be funded because my religious beliefs say it's wrong". (besides which there is nothing in Christianity that says anything of the sort, it's purely a made up fiction of Bush.)
Reply #18 from JoeUser Forums Top

#16 by John Galt
Sunday, June 19, 2005


Keep in mind however that Bush is against ANY research into stem-cells and has promised to veto ANY bill on the subject.


This statement is flat wrong! Bush has given MILLION's in research money for stem cell research. Do a little more homework sonny. He is opposed to giving federal grants that open "new" lines of stem cells.
Reply #19 from JoeUser Forums Top

Yes, no research should get funding Dr. Guy and everyone else. But as I said, if one is going to get it, they all must. You don't get to pick and choose and certainly not based on your personal religious beliefs. You're the head of government. You do get to choose where your own money goes. You do not get to choose which group of people get the benefit of the government and who don't unless it's solely on merit. Just like gay marriage, there is no merit involved in W's veto.


And your "just" as wrong here! As the head of state he damn well does get to pick "where" our tax dollars go and "who" gets them.
Reply #20 from JoeUser Forums Top
But as I said, if one is going to get it, they all must. You don't get to pick and choose and certainly not based on your personal religious beliefs. You're the head of government. You do get to choose where your own money goes.

That is in fact part of his job description, so you're flat wrong on that one.

There is nothing stopping anyone from doing research, just from getting any more Federal money for it. Believe me, if there's a buck to be made from it the large drug companies will be shelling out the money for it. There is no rational reason why tax dollars should be going into this.

There is also no real reason for embryonic research in the first place as adult stem cell research will easily yield comparable results. It's just sick to create living human embryos for the sole purpose of detroying them. Tax money shouldn't be spent on this sort of thing. Adult stem cell research, sure. Embryonic, no.

Fact is, using a few cells THAT ARE GOING TO BE DESTROYED ANYWAY...

Not if they weren't created in the first place.
Reply #21 from JoeUser Forums Top
If you embrace life, you must reject embryonic stem cell research as it destroys life.

Who decides if your life is more impornat than John Doe's? You? Someone died and made you GOD?

I addressed this in my article. Read it again. Possibity, versus real live people.


You did, so why resurrect it? What is your point in doing so?
Reply #22 from JoeUser Forums Top
If you embrace life, you must reject embryonic stem cell research as it destroys life.

Who decides if your life is more impornat than John Doe's? You? Someone died and made you GOD?

I addressed this in my article. Read it again. Possibity, versus real live people.


You did, so why resurrect it? What is your point in doing so?