posted on June 20, 2007 01:47:15 PM new
"The president supports and encourages stem cell research, including using embryonic lines, as long as it does not involve creating, harming or destroying embryos," Fratto said. "That is an ethical line that should not be crossed."
The vetoed bill "would support the taking of innocent human life in the hope of finding medical benefits for others," the president said, as babies cooed and cried behind him. "It crosses a moral boundary that our decent society needs to respect." Each child on the stage, he said, "began his or her life as a frozen embryo that was created for in vitro fertilization but remained unused after the fertility treatments were complete. . . . These boys and girls are not spare parts."
Within hours of Bush's announcement, the House, as expected, fell short in a bid to override the veto, extinguishing the issue as a legislative matter this year but not as a political matter.
It is foolish and wrong to mourn the men who died. Rather we should thank God that such men lived.George S. Patton
posted on June 20, 2007 02:48:35 PM new
Bush thinks it's more important to throw an embryo into a garbage can than to find cures and treatements for life threatening and debilitating diseases.
Embryonic cells alone can be made to grow into almost any other type of cell, whereas researchers believe that adult stem cells cannot.
posted on June 20, 2007 04:13:33 PM new
"The president supports and encourages stem cell research, including using embryonic lines, as long as it does not involve creating, harming or destroying embryos," Fratto said. "That is an ethical line that should not be crossed."
Ebryonic cells by the millions are thrown in the dumpster at fertility clinics all over the country because they are not needed anymore. Why is this considered "ethical", but using these embryonic cells for research is not considered ethical? These cells are already there and can be utilized for medical research to benefit millions of sick people. What kind of convoluted thinking is this?
[ edited by coincoach on Jun 20, 2007 04:17 PM ]
posted on June 20, 2007 04:32:33 PM new
I am not a big fan of Harry Reid, but his statement illustrates Bush's MO on important decisions:
"President Bush won't listen to the more than 500 leading organizations who support the bill including AARP, the American Medical Association and the American Diabetes Association, just to name a few," Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said.
"President Bush won't listen to the 80 Nobel laureates or his own director of the National Institutes of Health, who all support embryonic stem cell research. Most importantly, President Bush won't listen to the overwhelming majority of Americans who call out for stem cell research."
posted on June 20, 2007 06:06:16 PM new
I fully support his vetoing this bill.
No reason to produce human babies just to destroy them. There are too many other stem cell lines that can be experimented upon and used no need to even go here.
Thank GOD for a strong, moral man like President Bush who stands strong in his convictions of right and wrong.
Too many have lost their way.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
posted on June 20, 2007 07:51:04 PM newhttp://www.reuters.com/news/video/videoStory?videoId=57599
President Bush, in vetoing this for the SECOND TIME:
"Bush noted that scientists this month reported that in tests with mice they had made progress on alternative ways to produce stem cells without destroying embryos -- a breakthrough, which if it works in humans, could ease ethical concerns."
What to breed babies to kill them? Then do it with PRIVATE funding....not our tax dollars.
posted on June 20, 2007 09:16:25 PM new
No big deal. If the USA won't do the research it'll be done offshore and the benefits will take longer to trickle down to those in the USA. Patents and profits will enrich other countries at the USA's expense.
posted on June 20, 2007 09:40:31 PM new
"Thank GOD for a strong, moral man like President Bush who stands strong in his convictions of right and wrong."
Moral? How moral is it to veto a bill that is the last hope for many who suffer from Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, spinal cord injuries, diabetes, etc--none of which I would wish on my worst enemy. The inflammatory propaganda about killing babies to get stem cells is what's IMMORAL. Vetoing this bill is what's IMMORAL. Allowing people to continue to suffer from these diseases, when there is evidence that there is real hope in stem cell research is what is IMMORAL.
posted on June 20, 2007 10:45:31 PM new
One almost has to hope that George Bush experiences in his own extended family the need for such research--but he probably wouldn't even make the mental connection. What a fool. Why doesn't he police the garbage cans the unused embryos are thrown into, if human "life" means so much to him? Where are the right-to-lifers, when they should be hovering in the alleys, looking for "babies" in the garbage?
_____________________
There is more to life than increasing its speed. --Mahatma Gandhi
posted on June 20, 2007 10:51:03 PM new
Thanks, Profe. When I find myself in agreement with you (which is 99% of the time,) I know I'm on the right track. You are one of the most sensible, intelligent and reality-based posters I've read---and you have a great sense of humor. I love a guy with a great sense of humor .
posted on June 20, 2007 11:29:44 PM new
It's very sad that Bush vetoed this but not at all surprising to me because I don't think he fully understands it.
For those of us who have witnessed loved ones suffer from ALS and Parkinson's we've always held hope for any new research or any drug to ease the progress of it. We've always admired those who have participated in the research projects, subjecting themselves to numerous tests and taking new experimental drugs, making themselves human guinea pigs.
There is some news today on the latest research.
Master regulator of the stem cell state
Medical Research News
Published: Wednesday, 20-Jun-2007
For more than 25 years, stem cells have been defined based on what they can become: more of themselves, as well as multiple different specialized cell types.
But as genetic techniques have become increasingly powerful, many scientists have sought a more molecular definition of stem cells, based on the genes they express.
Now, a team of Canadian scientists has identified 1,155 genes under the control of a gene called Oct4 considered to be the master regulator of the stem cell state. A comprehensive molecular definition of stem cells is emerging: according to this research, stem cells are cells that keep their DNA packaged in a flexible format, keep cell division tightly controlled, prevent signals that might trigger death, repair DNA very effectively, and reinforce all of these characteristics by tightly controlling how molecules can move within the nucleus. The study will be published in the June 20 edition of the online, open-access journal PLoS ONE.
"You could call this a theory-of-everything for stem cells," said senior author Dr. Michael Rudnicki, referring to the often-cited theory of everything for physics. Dr. Rudnicki is a Senior Scientist and Professor at the Ottawa Health Research Institute and the University of Ottawa. He also leads the Sprott Centre for Stem Cell Research in Ottawa and Canada's Stem Cell Network.
While previous studies have tried to compare gene expression in different types of stem cells, the strategy used in this study was unique. Rather than simply searching for any genes expressed by stem cells, the researchers looked for genes whose expression was also correlated with the master stem cell regulator gene Oct4. They also applied very rigorous analysis methods, using data from StemBase, the largest stem cell gene expression database in the world. Designed by bioinformaticist Dr. Miguel Andrade, the database includes data from thousands of DNA microarrays submitted mainly by scientists in Canada's Stem Cell Network. All data is freely available at www.stembase.ca.
Lead author Ms. Pearl Campbell noted that understanding how stem cells maintain their identity is key to the emerging field of regenerative medicine. "These findings may help us to understand how the key genes which control cell fate are regulated, and how, when dysregulated, they can lead to disease. This may ultimately allow us to develop targeted therapies to stimulate adult stem cells within our own bodies to repair damaged tissues, and may provide further areas of exploration for the treatment of cancer."
posted on June 21, 2007 06:46:39 AM new
OK, I know bushit doesn't give a rat'sass about babies or life or anything that doesn't benefit him or his party. So I wonder what the REAL reason is that he was instructed to veto this bill?????
""No reason to produce human babies just to destroy them.""
posted on June 21, 2007 07:19:49 AM newMoral? How moral is it to veto a bill that is the last hope for many who suffer from Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, spinal cord injuries, diabetes, etc--none of which I would wish on my worst enemy. The inflammatory propaganda about killing babies to get stem cells is what's IMMORAL. Vetoing this bill is what's IMMORAL. Allowing people to continue to suffer from these diseases, when there is evidence that there is real hope in stem cell research is what is IMMORAL.
I wonder if Linda will still believe "Thank GOD for a strong, moral man like President Bush who stands strong in his convictions of right and wrong." when she is suffering from Parkinsons and can barely move.
My thoughts are if people who find stem cell research immoral and wrong do not have to receive the treatment that this research provides when they are suffering from a disease. I hope their doctor says, well you objected to the research years ago, you just have to suffer the consequences now because you felt it was immoral. I'm sorry but you are going to die in a month. You better make your peace now. I have other patients that supported stem cell research so I am going to help them.
Absolute faith has been shown, consistently, to breed intolerance. And intolerance, history teaches us, again and again, begets violence.
---------------------------------- The duty of a patriot in this time and place is to ask questions, to demand answers, to understand where our nation is headed and why. If the answers you get do not suit you, or if they frighten you, or if they anger you, it is your duty as a patriot to dissent. Freedom does not begin with blind acceptance and with a flag. Freedom begins when you say 'No.'
posted on June 21, 2007 07:49:12 AM new
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA) today released the following statement on the House of Representatives’ passage of S. 5, The Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act. Harkin has led efforts in the Senate to allow federal funds to be used for stem cell research that has the potential to treat or cure diseases affecting over 100 million Americans.
“I applaud the House for passing the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act. The overwhelming majority of Americans – and their members of Congress – agree that it is time to take the shackles off of our federal researchers and allow them to move forward with some of the most exciting and promising research of modern times.
“There is no reason why the President should not sign this bill.
This bill does not lift the ban on using federal funding to destroy embryos. It also includes stricter ethical requirements on stem cell research than those currently in place.
“Americans should know that under this bill, the only way a stem cell line could be eligible for federally funded research is if it were derived from an embryo that was otherwise going to be discarded, and the donors had provided written, informed consent. There are more than 400,000 embryos in the United States that are left over in fertility clinics, and almost all of those embryos will eventually be thrown away.
“The President now has a choice to make. He can sit back while these embryos are discarded, or he can make the moral and humane choice and allow our scientists to provide hope and cures to the millions of Americans suffering from Parkinson’s, cancer, juvenile diabetes and a host of other illnesses.
“Americans, Congress, and our nation’s leading scientists are counting on President Bush to make the truly pro-life decision and sign S.5""""
posted on June 21, 2007 09:11:11 AM new
"This bill does not lift the ban on using federal funding to destroy embryos. It also includes stricter ethical requirements on stem cell research than those currently in place."
Mingo--Don't confuse the issue with facts. It is much more important to scream false statements like "killing babies for stem cells" that to acknowledge the facts.
posted on June 21, 2007 02:34:40 PM new
CC - There are NO guarantees that embryo stem cells will give any more benefits than those other groups of stem cell research already being studied now.
It's moral to try the methods of stem cell research that ARE already seeing progress, the ones that don't TAKE life to preserve the life of others - IF it even would.
As I said...creating life to destroy life is not supporting life itself.
I understand most liberals disregard life in many different aspects. Those who support life don't. This is but one area where the pro-lifers vs the anti-lifers are argued.
Want embryonic stem cell research....then give to the groups who are working on it with PRIVATE funding.
==============
edited to add info. on the state of CA and where they're headed
posted on June 21, 2007 04:03:12 PM new
\"CC - There are NO guarantees that embryo stem cells will give any more benefits than those other groups of stem cell research already being studied now.\"
Without embryo stem cells, I guarantee we will never find out.
\"As I said...creating life to destroy life is not supporting life itself.\"
Hundreds of thousands of embryonic cells have already been created in fertility clinics all over the country. If they are not used by the donors who created them, or donated to other women who are trying become pregnant, they are dumped in the garbage--hundreds of thousand of them. Don\'t you find that repugnant? Instead of dumping them, why not use them for research to benefit millions of people?
posted on June 21, 2007 04:08:31 PM new
CC....what you are MISSING.....or just chosing to DISREGARD....that I have said...is we don't need the FEDERAL GOV to fund this.
There is private ways....here are grants from different states...there are other ways rather than forcing those of us who don't WANT our tax dollars being used to create life only to destroy it.
Plus there are all sorts of other stem cell research going on right now.
It's a moral issue, imo. And you and I and most liberals are NEVER going to be on the same page when it comes to creating LIFE in order to TAKE LIFE.
posted on June 21, 2007 04:27:53 PM new
Moral? How moral is it to veto a bill that is the last hope for many who suffer from Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, spinal cord injuries, diabetes, etc--none of which I would wish on my worst enemy. The inflammatory propaganda about killing babies to get stem cells is what's IMMORAL. Vetoing this bill is what's IMMORAL. Allowing people to continue to suffer from these diseases, when there is evidence that there is real hope in stem cell research is what is IMMORAL.
What? You expect people to live forever?
It is foolish and wrong to mourn the men who died. Rather we should thank God that such men lived.George S. Patton
posted on June 21, 2007 04:44:02 PM new
Well, Linda,I am forced to help pay for this war in Iraq, which has caused the deaths of over 3,000 Americans. I am morally against paying for this, but yet am forced to. You have more concern for a few embryonic cells which may never create a baby than you do for the cream of the crop of our young Americans getting blown to bits. You are morally bankrupt.
posted on June 21, 2007 04:47:12 PM new
LOL....well, I don't agree. SO THERE. lol lol
That's what happens when we get the PResident we want in the WH. We get support for what we approve of and what we don't. [most of the time lol]
Just as the congress TWICE passed laws outlawing partial birth abortion....and clinton vetoed them both times....the same is happening now with a PRO LIFE President in office.
posted on June 21, 2007 04:53:54 PM new
"the same is happening now with a PRO LIFE President in office."
PRO LIFE my eye. Tell that to the 3,000 soldiers killed in Iraq and the families of millions who have died from spinal cord injuries,Alzheimers,Parkinson's,diabetes.....But that's ok. He has saved thousands of blastocysts. What a humanitarian.
posted on June 21, 2007 04:55:40 PM new
Tell that to a 20 year old soldier who had his spinal cord severed by a bullet, you idiot. Look him in the eye and tell him that!
Thats a risk that comes with the uniform. He knew it when he enlisted.
It is foolish and wrong to mourn the men who died. Rather we should thank God that such men lived.George S. Patton
posted on June 21, 2007 04:59:38 PM new
Bear I was talking about future stem cell treatment/cure for spinal cord injuries--a very real possibility if stem cell research is fully supported. Went right over your head.
.